LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

RECEIVED    BY   EXCHANGE 

Class 


Some  Aspects 


of  the 


Social  Power  of  Wealth. 


By 
EDWIN  HELLASY  WILLISFORD,  B,  /).,   HI 


LINCOLN,   NEBRASKA. 

1907. 


SOME  ASPECTS 


OF  THE 


Social    Power    of    Wealth. 


A  Thesis  Presented  to  the  Faculty  of    the 

UNIVERSITY  OF  NEBRASKA 


BY 


EDWIN  HELLABY  WILLISFORD,  A.  M.,  B.  D. 


In  Partial  Fulfillment  of  the  Requirements  for  the  Degree  of 
Doctor  of  Philosophy. 


LINCOLN 
1906. 


CONTENTS.  PAGE 

Introduction 5 

PART  I. 

CHAPTER  WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE. 

I.   Wealth  the  Medium  of  Social  Progress 8 

Large  Wealth  Essential 8 

Possession  not  Sufficient 10 

Values : 10 

Sources  of  Wealth 13 

II.   Shiftings  of  Accent  on  Wealth 16 

Time  Shiftings 16 

Place  Shiftings 18 

III.  Desire  and  Imitation 20 

Desire  a  Social  Force 20 

Imitation  a  Social  Force 22 

IV.  Sources  of  Aristocracy 24 

Direct  Sources 24 

Indirect  Sources 24 

Personal  Favor  and  Service 26 

Religion 28 

Wealth  as  a  Source 28 

PART  II. 

WEALTH    AND    RELIGION. 

I.   The  Significance  of  Rites 33 

II.   Primitive  Conceptions  of  Nature  and  its  Relation  to 

Sacrifice 35 

Origin  of  Sacrifice 35 

The  Commercial  Use  of  Sacrifice 38 

Some  Teachings  of  the  East 41 

III.  Occasions  of  Sacrifice 42 

IV.  Priesthood 44 

Origin 44 

Functions   46 

V.    Hebraism 47 

VI.   The  Early  Christian  Era 51 

VII.   The  Middle  Ages  and  To-Day 53 

Sources  of  Church  Wealth 53 

Influence  of  Wealth  on  the  Church 55 

To-Day 57 

3 

228285 


4  CONTENTS 

PART  III. 

CHAPTER  WEALTH    AND    LAW.  PAGE 

I.    Primitive  Law 58 

Self-Redress 58 

Blood-Feud 59 

II.   Compensations 59 

Wergeld  or  Man  Value 59 

Wergeld  and  Rank 61 

Wealth  and  Protection 62 

III.  Codes 64 

Hammurabi 64 

Gentoo 65 

Israelitish  Law 68 

Tables  of  Gortyna 68 

Anglo-Saxon 69 

Class  Gradations 70 

Law  of  Person  and  Property 71 

Imprisonment  and  Debt 72 

Witness  and  Rank . .  74 

IV.  Influence  on  Administration 74 

PART  IV. 

WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTERESTS. 

I.    Early  Practices 77 

Feudalism 77 

The  Brehon  Law 80 

Promotions 80 

Wealth  Secures  Political  Rights 81 

II.   Germanic  Practices 83 

Mass  Against  Class 83 

Legislation 85 

Poland 88 

The  Present  German  Situation 88 

Wealth  and  Taxation 90 

III.  America 91 

Qualification  for  Suffrage 91 

Qualification  for  Office 93 

IV.  The  Illicit  Use  of  Wealth 96 

Conclusion 97 

Bibliography 99 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Social 
Power  of  Wealth. 


INTRODUCTION, 

Facts  without  theories  are  delusive;  theories  without  facts  are 
vain. — KANT. 

In  harmony  with  this  thought  of  Kant,  the  scope  of  this 
thesis  will  assume  a  two-fold  character;  (1)  the  collection  and 
comparison  of  facts,  and,  (2)  the  consideration  of  the  deduc- 
tions therefrom. 

To  study  the  customs  and  institutions  of  a  people,  is  one 
of  the  best  ways  to  learn  their  history.  All  peoples  have  cer- 
tain well  defined1  and  developed  customs  and  institutions; 
among  these  are  marriage,  family,  religion,  military  system, 
property,  government  and  law.  Attention  will  be  given  to  the 
study  of  such  customs  and  institutions,  covering  long  periods 
of  time,  as  will  show  the  influence  of  wealth  on  social  life;  and 
the  varying  effect  of  wealth  in  the  stages  through  which  the 
race  has  passed;  as  the  savage,  barbaric,  and  civilized;  also  the 
effect  of  the  economic  and  political  forces,  such  as  normadic 
conditions,  free  land,  proprietorship,  feudal  system,  inheritance 
and  entailed  property. 

The  commercial  aspect  of  wealth  has  received  much  atten- 
tion, but  the  social  power  of  wealth  has  had  but  scant  con- 
sideration. Therefore  the  purpose  of  this  thesis  will  be  to 
prove  that  wealth  plays  an  important  social  role  and  that  the 
possession  of  wealth  and  its  conspicuous  consumption  yields  so- 
cial prestige. 

The  social  power  of  wealth  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  enables 
the  possessor  (1)  to  satisfy  his  non-economic  desires;  (2)  to  en- 
joy immunity  from  many  requirements  which  the  man  in  gen- 
eral must  meet,  and  (3)  to  ignore  custom  without  loss  of  caste. 
The  old  is  sacred,  custom  is  law  inexorable,  possession  of  wealth 
permits  a  departure  from,  a  disregard  of  custom,  and  law,  not 

Sevens.     An  Introduction  to  the  History  of  Religion,  2. 

5 


6  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

only  with  impunity  but  such  disregard  and  departure  tends  to 
increase  the  social  power  of  the  individual.  Wealth  helps  to 
rive  the  sail  of  an  opponent,  to  escape  justice,  to  secure  the 
favor  of  the  gods — and  of  men. 

To  clearly  discern  between  the  social  or  non-economic  and 
the  economic  aspects  of  wealth  is  not  always  easy.  The  latter 
has  to  do  with  the  production  of  wealth  while  the  former  has 
to  do  with  the  consumption  of  wealth,  particularly  in  those 
forms  of  consusumption  which  satisfy  the  non-economic  wants 
and  desires  of  man. 

The  economist  deals  with  the  production  of  wealth,  with 
profits,  with  dividends;  the  sociologist  with  the  expenditure  of 
wealth  and  especially  its  social  effects.  Commercial  activity 
has  too  often  been  considered  the  end,  when  in  fact,  it  is  the 
means  or  highway  to  the  end.  " Broadly  stated,  economics  may 
be  said  to  benefit  the  producer  while  sociology  benefits  the 
consumer.  But  the  term  producer  must  be  taken  in  its  widest 
and  really  proper  sense  of  any  one  who  by  any  form  of  labor 
adds  anything  to  the  value,  i.  e.  to  the  utility  of  a  product. 
The  term  consumer,  on  the  contrary  must  be  taken  irrespective 
of  whether  he  is  also  a  producer  or  not."1  Commercially  men 
seek  to  acquire  wealth  that  they  may  transact  a  still  larger 
business,  socially  men  seek  wealth  that  it  may  be  expended, 
like  that  of  the  old  Venetian,  in  palaces,  and  galleries,  gather- 
ing therein  the  glories  of  the  fine  old  world  life.  Many  a  man 
is  goading  himself  on  in  the  mad  stampede  for  wealth  in  order 
that  his  bank  account  may  allow  him  to  enlarge  and  beautify 
his  home,  to  enrich  it  with  the  paintings  of  the  masters,  with 
famous  statuary,  with  rare  books  and  renowned  bric-a-brac;  he 
well  knows  that  such  conspicuous  display  of  wealth  yields  large 
returns  in  social  prestige.  There  is  a  sense  in  which  the  econ- 
omic man  may  be  at  the  same  time  the  non-economic  man, 
for,  "the  economic  man  is  not  plain  affinity  for  wealth.  Some- 
times he  is  a  more  expert  and  persistent  scatterer  than  accumu- 
lator of  wealth.  Sometimes  wealth  is  almost  altogether  a  means 
with  him,  and  scarcely  to  any  appreciable  degree  an  end.  Some- 
times he  plays  the  economic  game  just  as  another  plays  whist 
or  billiards  or  golf.  Sometimes  he  wants  wealth  because  his 

»Ward.     Outlines  of  Sociology,  285. 


INTRODUCTION.  7 

wife  wants  society.  Sometimes  he  wants  wealth  in  order  to 
propagate  his  creed,  or  to  punish  his  enemy,  or  to  win  a  maid, 
or  to  buy  a  title,  or  to  control  a  party.  In  either  case  the 
economic  man  is  a  man  of  highly  mixed  motives."1 

Wealth  as  a  social  factor  has  too  long  been  overlooked. 
The  proper  interpretation  of  its  relation  to  society  will  serve 
to  explain  many  of  the  problems  which  have  long  remained 
unsolved.  Its  study  has  revealed  so  many  of  the  reasons  for 
conditions  as  they  now  exist  that  it  has  come  to  be  considered 
the  magic  key  for  revealing  the  secrets  of  the  past. 


NOTE. 

In  addition  to  the  study  already  in  evidence  much  research 
has  been  made  and  much  material  gathered  on  the  following 
topics.  I.  Wealth  and  Woman,  including,  wife  purchase,  free 
choice,  marriage,  divorce,  birth  rate,  prostitution,  economic  and 
social  status.  2.  Wealth  and  Art,  character  of  early  art, 
deteriorating  effect  of  wealth.  3.  Wealth  and  Display,  cere- 
monies, decoration,  ornamentation,  dress,  insignia,  titles,  ances- 
tors, national  and  race  characteristics,  as  Negro,  Spaniard, 
Italian,  German,  English,  etc.  4.  Amusements,  sports,  as 
reserves  for  game,  special  game  laws  for  benefit  of  wealthy. 
5.  Origin  and  purpose  of  sumptuary  laws.  6.  Property,  kinds, 
significance  of,  inheritance,  primogeniture  and  dower,  7.  Wealth 
and  military  service,  equites,  knights,  etc.  8.  Limitations  of 
the  Social  Power  of  Wealth. 

'Small.     General  Sociology,  450. 


THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 


PART  I. 


WEALTH  AND  SOCIAL  PRESTIGE. 


CHAPTER  I. 

WEALTH  THE  MEDIUM  OF  SOCIAL  PROGRESS. 
LARGE  WEALTH  ESSENTIAL. 

The  term  "wealthy"  is  only  relative.  It  cannot  be  given  a 
definite  value.  When  used  to  express  the  worth  of  an  indi- 
vidual it  must  signify  that  he  possesses  goods  in  large  quanti- 
ties, in  quantities,  more  than  the  majority  of  his  fellows  pos- 
sess. To  secure  favor  or  prestige  there  must  be  relatively  large 
possessions.  For  if,  "all  men  were  possessed  of  a  great  deal, 
but  all  of  an  equal  amount,  each  would  be  compelled,  in  may 
be  conjectured  to  be  his  own  chimney  sweep,  his  own  scavenger 
and  boot  black.  And  how  can  anyone  then  be  properly  called 
wealthy?  This  is  the  social  side  of  the  idea  of  wealth.  Hence 
a  person,  with  the  same  resources  might  be  very  wealthy  in  a 
provincial  town,  while  in  the  capital,  he  could  enjoy  only  mod- 
erate comfort."1 

The  kind  of  wealth  is  not  so  important.  Among  the  early 
Greeks  any  product  possessed  in  quantity  constituted  wealth. 
But  when  civilization  is  advanced  far  enough  so  that  a  state 
is  formed,  a  symbol,  representative  of  wealth  is  adopted,  namely, 
money.  This  becomes  the  substitute  for  all  forms  of  property 
and  the  pursuit  of  wealth  becomes  the  pursuit  for  money. 

The  possession  of  large  wealth  and  its  relation  to  social  pres- 
tige seems  to  suggest  the  following  laws  and  corollary:— 

1.  Incomes  that  leave  no  margin  for  unproductive  consump- 
tion and  conspicuous  display  do  not  procure  social  prestige. 
2.  That  any  increase  in  incomes  that  leaves  a  margin  confers 
social  prestige.  3.  That  the  amount  of  social  prestige  yielded 
by  such  surplus  is  not  proportional  with  the  increase.  That  is, 
any  increase  in  the  margin,  yields  more  than  a  corresponding 
increase  of  social  prestige. 

1Roscher.     Principles  of  Political  Economy,  1;  68-69. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  9 

The  philosophy  of  this  is  based  on^the  principle  that  the 
expenditures  of  men  are  divided  into  three  classes,  A.  Neces- 
sities. B.  Comforts.  C.  Luxuries.  Let  $400  represent  the  cost 
of  necessities.  Then  if  A,  B  and  C  receive  $400  each  they  will 
only  be  able  to  supply  themselves  with  necessities  and  all  will 
live  on  the  same  scale.  But  if  the  income  should  be  increased, 
so  that  B  should  receive  $500  and  C  $600  and  A's  remains  at 
$400,  and  $400  be  the  point  where  comforts  begin  and  $500  the 
point  for  luxuries;  then  A,  B  and  C  will  no  longer  be  on  the 
same  social  level,  for  B  will  have  $100  to  spend  for  comforts 
and  C  will  have  $100  for  comforts  and  $100  for  luxuries.  The 
standard  of  living  being  unchanged  there  are  three  social  levels 
created.  If  $100  be  again  added  to  the  incomes  so  that  they 
are  $500,  $600  and  $700  respectively,  more  than  proportional 
increase  is  added  to  the  ability  of  B  and  C  to  make  a  conspicu- 
ous display  and  they  will  secure  much  more  than  the  propor- 
tional amount  of  social  prestige. 

The  party  who  drives  a  four-horse  carriage  attracts  more 
than  double  the  attention  that  the  one  does  who  drives  a  two- 
horse  carriage,  and  eight  horses  adds  more  than  twice  four,  for 
such  additional  expenditure  is  largely  display,  it  attracts  public 
attention,  it  displays  ability  to  expend  wealth  for  unproductive 
consumption. 

It  has  been  found  that  a  full  page  advertisement  is  worth 
not  twice  the  value  of  a  half  page  advertisement,  but  twenty- 
five  times  the  value  for  advertising  purposes;  and  a  half  page 
advertisement  is  worth  fifteen  times  the  value  of  a  quarter  page; 
and  a  ten-line  agate  item  as  compared  with  a  quarter-page  ad- 
vertisement has  no  value  at  all. 

The  following  explanation  is  given:  "The  secret  seems  to 
lie  in  tbe  prestige  acquired  by  the  use  of  the  larger  space.  The 
public  is  impressionable.  If  the  common  mind  can  be  made  to 
think  in  a  certain  way  or  direction  it  may  be  said  to  be  im- 
pressed with  the  idea  conveyed.  Once  so  impressed,  the  public 
is  likely  to  act  in  accordance  with  that  idea.  The  public  moves 
as  a  crowd,  is  swayed  by  what  may  be  called  the  intelligence 
of  the  crowd,  as  distinguished  from  the  intelligence  of  the  inid- 
vidual.  How  otherwise  may  we  account  for  the  phenomenon 
exhibited  when  people  put  themselves  to  actual  discomfort  in 
order  to  purchase  where  there  is  a  great  crowd,  when  goods  of 


10  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

equal  quality  and  the  same  price  may  be  had  elsewhere,  in 
places  that  are  not  crowded?  A  certain  dealer  obtains  vogue 
and  becomes  the  fashion;  people  talk  of  his  establishment,  of 
his  goods,  and  of  the  throng  of  purchasers;  and  this  prestige 
adds  to  his  trade." 

This  is  only  a  partial  explanation.  The  full  page  catches 
the  eye  of  more  people,  hence  more  people  are  likely  to  be  im- 
pressed and  to  patronize  such  firms.  Advertising  is  display, 
publicity,  the  attraction  of  public  attention,  as  well  as  the  an- 
nouncement of  ability  to  perform  services.  So  the  large  display 
of  honorific  goods  attracts  attention  and  gives  the  impression  of 
social  superiority. 

POSSESSION  NOT  SUFFICIENT. 

The  possession  of  wealth  even  in  great  quantity  is  not  alone 
sufficient  to  yield  social  prestige,  there  must  be  quality.  The 
stable  must  not  only  possess  a  large  number  of  horses  but  these 
must  be  thorough-breds,  horses  with  records,  with  pedigrees. 
Social  prestige  requires  in  addition  to  possession  of  wealth  in 
quantity  and  quality,  another  element,  namely,  conspicuous  dis- 
play. The  thoroughbred  must  appear  in  public,  beautiful  car- 
riages, splendid  accoutrements  must  add  the  testimony  of  lux- 
ury displayed  to  wealth  possessed.  Page  gives  an  extract  from 
a  letter,  which  shows  that,  in  the  long  ago,  it  was  the  conspicu- 
ous spending  of  the  dollar  for  non-economic  services  that  at- 
tracted attention  and  marked  the  gentleman.  "For  you  know 
nothing  so  soon  signalizes  a  man  as  a  fine  gentleman,  as  being 
able  to  say,  to  one  servant,  'here,  my  boy,  take  this  dollar  for 
the  trouble  that  I  have  given  you  since  my  arrival,'  and  to  an- 
other, 'this  half  dollar,'  and  so  on."1 

VALUES. 

Has  wealth  a  standard  of  measure?  Can  it  be  given  an 
exact  rating?  Can  wealth  as  a  social  force  be  given  a  value? 
For  the  measure  of  extent  there  is  the  inch,  the  foot,  the  mile; 
for  weight,  the  ounce,  the  pound,  the  ton;  for  capacity,  the 
quart,  the  gallon,  the  barrel;  for  heat,  the  degree,  for  light,  the 
candlepower.  All  scientific  deductions  are  based  on  counting 
and  measuring.  But  how  can  such  a  power  as  that  of  non- 

iPage.     Life  in  Colonial  Virginia,  33. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  11 

economic  wealth  be  measured.  It  has  already  been  stated  that 
wealth  is  a  means  and  not  an  end.  But  it  is  a  means  of  fluctu- 
ating value.  Its  value  is  determined  by  the  effective  demandj 
that  is,  by  what  people  will  give  for  it;  by  the  amount  of  sacri-r 
fice  they  are  willing  to  make  to  acquire  the  prestige  whicl} 
wealth  secures. 

Professor  Ross  raises  the  question,  " Against  what  indeed 
shall  wealth  be  measured?  Where  are  the  markets  which  regis- 
ter its  fluctuations?  But  such  markets  exist,  always  have  ex- 
isted. Are  there  not  streets  where  woman's  virtue  is  sold?  Are 
there  not  common-wealths  where  there  is  a  ruling  price  for 
votes?  Do  not  the  comparative  rewards  of  occupations  indi- 
cate what  inducements  will  overcome  the  love  of  independence, 
of  safety,  of  good  repute?  We  see  men  sacrificing  health,  or 
leisure,  or  family  life,  or  offspring,  or  friends,  or  liberty,  or 
honor,  or  truth,  for  gain.  The  volume  of  such  spiritual  goods 
Mammon  can  lure  into  the  market  measures  the  power  of  money. 
By  the  choices  men  make  in  such  cases  and  by  the  judgment 
others  pass  upon  such  choices  we  can  ascertain  what  is  the  so- 
cial estimate  of  wealth.  When  gold  cannot  shake  the  noble- 
man's pride  of  caste,  the  statesman's  patriotism,  the  soldier's 
honor,  the  wife's  fidelity,  .the  official's  sense  of  duty,  or  the 
artist's  devotion  to  his  ideal,  wealth  is  cheap.  But  when 
maidens  yield  themselves  to  senile  moneybags,  youths  swarm 
about  the  unattractive  heiress,  judges  take  bribes,  experts  sell 
their  opinions  to  the  highest  bidder,  and  genius  champions  the 
cause  it  does  not  believe  in,  wealth  is  rated  high."1 

Lindley  M.  Keasbey  shows  that  possessions  have  three  val- 
ues: 1.  Use  value.  2.  Exchange  value.  3.  Prestige  value. 
This  classification  is  important.  He  further  states  that  value 
may  be  regarded  from  two  general  standpoints.  (A)  " Subject- 
ively, value  indicates  the  importance  a  person  attaches  to  the 
possession  of  a  good  for  any  particular  purpose;  while,  (B)  ob-* 
jectively  considered,  value  expresses  the  capacity  or  power  the 
good  possesses  to  fulfill  such  purpose." 

Goods  which  give  immediate  satisfaction  through  immediate  f 
use  are  valued  but  the  accumulation  of  property  gives  satisfac-j 
tion  because  it  secures  the  "prestige  of  proprietorship."  For 

'Ross.     Foundations  of  Sociology,  171. 


12  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

as  Keasbey  says,  "Subjectively  considered,  prestige  value  indi- 
cates the  importance  a  person  attaches  to  the  possession  of  a 
good,  not  primarily  for  immediate  consumption,  nor  again  for 
the  purpose  of  exchange  but  simply  for  the  sake  of  proprietor- 
ship *  *  *  he  hopes  by  the  possession  of  the  good  to  raise 
his  social  position,  to  add  to  his  dignity,  or  augment  in  some 
way  his  prestige.  For  example  the  patriarch  of  old  gloried  in 
the  number  of  his  herd,  the  medieval  proprietor  prided  himself 
upon  the  extent  of  his  estate  and  now-a-days  the  millionaire 
derives  similar  satisfaction  from  the  contents  of  his  strong  box."1 
The  less  useful  a  good  may  be  the  greater  prestige  value  it  may 
have.  "The  well-to-do  farmer  or  the  successful  mechanic,  sets 
store  by  his  front  parlor,  with  its  lace  curtains,  its  organ,  its 
parlor  suit,  not  because  he  uses  it  as  he  does  his  kitchen,  not 
because  he  has  any  thought  of  disposing  of  its  contents,  but 
simply  because  such  surroundings  indicate  a  distinct  standard 
of  life  and  establish  his  prestige  among  his  neighbors.  The 
cowboys  set  store  by  their  expensive  outfits,  consisting  of  a 
fine  felt  sombrero,  high  heeled  boots,  and  ornate  saddles;  schol- 
ars attach  importance  to  their  various  degrees;  officers  value 
their  multitudinous  titles  and  orders.  *  *  *  These  goods 
possess  value  not  because  they  can  be  exchanged  but  because 
their  possession  implies  power."1 

Proprietorship  has  become  important  on  account  of  the  in- 
creasing prestige  that  ownership  yields.  The  increasing  com- 
plex social  organization  intensifies  the  social  power  of  wealth. 
The  one  man  alone  on  an  island  though  it  be  as  large  as  Aus- 
tralia, secures  no  social  ascendency  no  matter  how  large  his  pos- 
sessions may  be.  He  must  have  dependents,  inferior  neighbors 
and  associates  to  be  impressed  by  the  value  of  his  property. 
The  boy  with  a  new  pair  of  red  top  boots,  a  jack  knife  and  a 
half-dozen  marbles  grades  much  higher  in  the  social  scale  than 
the  boy  without  these,  and  the  girl  whose  doll  can  open  and 
close  its  eyes  is  considered  superior  to  the  girl  whose  doll  can 
do  none  of  these  feats.  Keasbey  thinks  that  in  primitive  so- 
ciety men  accumulated  but  that  there  was  no  motive  to  accu- 
mulate, for  accumulation  added  nothing  to  the  accumulator's 
prestige.  It  was  capacity  to  acquire  rather  than  the  possession 

Keasbey.     Prestige  Value,  The  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  17;  461. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  13 

that  was  valued.  "Wives,  slaves,  trophies  and  ornaments/'1 
constituted  the  principal  wealth  in  this  early  stage.  When  men 
became  localized  and  cultivated  the  land  a  marked  change  took 
place,  for  the  cultivated  field  and  the  domesticated  herd  were 
the  more  productive,  these  in  turn  yielded  social  prestige  to  the 
owner.  And  again  such  a  person  utilized  the  labor  of  the  non- 
proprietor,  and  this  augmented  his  station.  And  now  pos- 
sessions were  of  value. 

The  commercial  era  afforded  new  sources  of  wealth.  "The 
rising  class  of  merchants  entered  commerce  not  so  much  to 
satisfy  their  immediate  wants  as  to  increase  their  possessions 
and  so  rival  in  wealth  and  importance  the  older  classes  of  landed 
proprietors.  Success  it  may  be  said,  has  everywhere  attended 
their  efforts;  until  in  our  day  exchange  is  no  longer  the  by-path, 
but  the  high  road  to  social  and  personal  and  political  prestige."2 

The  rise  of  a  common  medium  of  exchange  has  served  a  so- 
cial purpose,  for  it  has  furnished  a  common  standard  of  value, 
a  measure  by  which  the  goods  of  one  person  can  be  compared 
with  the  goods  of  another.  Since  there  is  a  common  monetary 
standard,  the  money  value  of  a  man's  possessions  may  be  taken 
as  the  measure  of  his  social  power.  For  whatever  amount  of 
money  value  he  may  have,  this  can  be  used  to  secure  whatever 
is  most  indicative  of  social  power,  whether  it  be  a  painting,  an 
automobile,  a  four-horse  carriage  or  a  piano  or  a  front  parlor. 

SOURCES  OF  WEALTH. 

The  rise  of  wealth  may  be  considered  as  a  mark  of  advance- 
ment. For  it  is  only  when  a  people  begin  to  accumulate  prop- 
erty that  they  are  able  to  provide  themselves  with  more  than 
a  mere  existence.  Capital  has  been  called  "stored  energy." 
Any  surplus  of  production  indicated  a  surplus  of  energy.  When- 
ever a  people  do  not  consume  all  the  product  of  their  exercised 
energy  the  excess  takes  the  form  of  wealth.  This  accumulation 
expresses  itself  as  a  social  force.  It  is  at  this  point  that  prog- 
ress begins.  For,  "the  way  in  which  people  get  their  living  is 
in  very  intimate  relation  with  their  social  life."3  Only  in  a  sys- 
tem of  private  ownership  are  wealth  distinctions  possible.  Col- 
lective ownership  makes  for  social  equality  and  the  abolition  of 

1Keasbey.     Prestige  Value.     The  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  17;  469. 
2Ibid,     470.  'Ely.     Evolution  of  Industrial  Society,  25. 


14  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

all  relationships  of  private  service.  The  varying  ability  to  ac- 
quire wealth  has  been  the  cause  of  the  varying  power  in  mili- 
tary, political,  juridical,  domestic  and  religious  spheres.  Be- 
cause the  possession  of  wealth  has  been  the  means  of  securing 
power,  men  in  all  ages  have  sought  its  acquirement. 

In  showing  the  stages  through  which  society  has  passed,  and 
how  each  stage  has  furnished  a  source  of  wealth,  Ely1  will  be 
followed.  Five  great  stages  are  recognized. 

1.  The  Hunting  and  Fishing  Stage.     This  is  not  only  the 
earliest  but  the  lowest  from  the  social  point  of  view.     The  meth- 
ods and  habits  of  obtaining  food  differs  but  little  from  that  of 
the  animal.     The  people  eat  what  can  be  found  and   most  easily 
obtained.     They  travel  to  the  places  of  food  supply.     There  is 
no  saving  for  the  morrow.     Social  distinctions  do  not  exist,  at 
least  such  as  may  appear  are  unimportant.     Wealth  plays  no 
part.     The  only  forms  of  wealth  are  the  simple  implements  of 
the  chase,  such  as  the  spear,  shield,  bow,  boomerrang,  stone 
knives,  etc.     There  is  no  private  property,  no  sense  of  propri- 
etorship, except  of  articles  of  personal  use.2 

2.  Pastoral  Stage.     In  this  stage  there  is  found  a  more  set- 
tled abode.     Certain  animals  are  domesticated  and  these  yield 
a  source  of  revenue.     Life  is  more  stable  and  the  livelihood 
more  certain.     "He  learns  to  take  more  thought  for  the  future. 
His  herds  and  flocks  represent  a  body  of  social  capital,  which 
must  be  preserved  intact  and  of  which  the  increase  only  can 
be  used.     There  is  a  development  of  the  institutions  of  private 
property,  not  as  yet  in  land,  but  in  movable  wealth,  and  in  con- 
sequence we  are  not  surprised  to  find  the  contrast  between  rich 
and  poor  making  its  appearance."3 

3.  Agricultural  Stage.     This  stage  is  closely  allied  to  the  pre- 
ceding, often  the  same  persons  engage  in  the  care  of  herds  and 
flocks  and  in  the  tillage  of  the  soil.     Private  ownership  is  one 
of  the  chief  characteristics  of  this  period.4     Trade  had  not  be- 
come much  of  a  source  of  wealth.     "Each  group  raised  and  made 
the  things  that  it  needed.     The  wants  of  the  people  were  simple, 
and  food,  clothing  and  fuel  could  all  be  obtained  at  home."5 
The  cultivation  of  the  soil  brought  about  a  more  stable  and 

!Ely.     Evolution  of  Industrial  Society,  25-99. 

2Ibid,  36-37.  8Ibid,  43.  *Ibid,  48.  BIbid,  50. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  15 

also  a  more  dense  population,  it  afforded  a  surer  source  of  in- 
come, and  produced,  " profound  changes  in  the  social  structure."1 

4.  The  Handicraft  Stage.     During  this  period  it  was  com- 
mon for  men  to  combine  the  tillage  of  the  soil  with  some  form 
of  handcraft,   "every   man   worked  for  himself,   with  his  own 
tools,  or  for  other  persons  who  were  not  far  above  him  in  the 
social  scale."2     While  this  furnished  a  new  source  of  supply  of 
wealth,  producers  and  consumers  were  on  the  same  social  level 
for  social  inequalities  did  not  exist. 

5.  Industrial  Stage.     With  the  introduction  of  mechanical 
inventions  and  applied  power  great  changes  took  place,  for  "it 
ushered  in  the  era  of  capitalism,  the  wage  system  and  the  ex- 
tensive use  of  credit."3     No  stage  produced  such  radical  social 
changes  as  this  one,  especially  in  its  later  periods.     Distinct  so- 
cial classes  are  formed,  classes  which  have  nothing  of  social  life 
in   common.     The   man   who   furnishes   the   capital   stands   far 
higher  than   the   man   who  furnishes   the   muscle  or  even  the 
brain. 

A  marked  change  takes  place  in  the  attitude  toward  the 
way  in  which  man  earns  or  obtains  his  wealth.  In  the  earliest 
stages  of  society,  women  are  the  principal  workers.  Later, 
slaves  are  forced  to  labor  for  the  community.  Then  the  work- 
ers become  free,  but  stand  at"  the  bottom  of  the  social  scale. 
Among  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  commerce  and  industry  were 
considered  unworthy  pursuits  for  a  citizen.  In  the  caste  sys- 
tem of  India  the  industrial  class  occupies  only  one  grade  higher 
than  the  servile  class.  Step  by  step  the  wealth-producing  mem- 
bers of  society  won  for  themselves  social  recognition.4 

A  step  further  must  be  taken  for  equal  ability  does  not  al- 
ways secure  equal  opportunity.  "Is  there  a  real  equality  of  op- 
portunity for  all  members  of  society  to  show  what  they  can  do? 
Vast  differences  in  wealth  stand  in  the  way  of  such  equality, 
for,  though  a  rich  man's  son  may  be  at  a  disadvantage  so  far 
as  temptation  to  idleness  is  concerned,  there  is  simply  no  com- 
parison between  his  opportunities  and  those  of  a  poor  man's 
son.  Difference  in  wealth  is,  indeed,  the  most  potent  cause  in 
the  formation  of  social  classes,  not  merely  because  great  wealth 
is  a  mark  of  distinction,  but  because  of  the  opportunities  it 

^ly.     Evolution  of  Industrial  Society,  47. 
2Ibid,  57.  "Ibid,  57.  "Ibid,  75. 


16  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

brings  to  developing  one's  powers,  and  because,  as  great  wealth 
persists,  habits  of  thought  and  life  are  formed  which  necessarily 
separate  class  from  class."1  Wealth  is  always  monopolistic  and 
aristocratic  in  its  tendencies. 

Wealth  once  acquired  tends  to  increase  by  means  of  its  own 
force.  "Another  force  operating  to  concentrate  the  ownership 
of  wealth  may  be  called  economic  inertia.  According  to  the 
principle  of  inertia,  forces  continue  to  operate  until  they  are 
checked  by  other  forces  coming  into  contact  with  them.  Those 
who  have  great  possessions  find  it  easy  to  add  to  them  by  a  pro- 
cess of  accumulation  which  requires  a  minimum  of  sacrifice."2 


CHAPTER  II. 

SHIFTINGS  OF  ACCENT  ON  WEALTH. 

TIME  SHIFTINGS. 

While  the  possession  and  expenditure  of  wealth  has  not 
been  the  same  in  all  ages  and  stages  of  development,  yet  to 
the  one  who  possessed  the  most  belonged  the  greatest  social 
power.  Though  primitive  man  sat  under  his  own  vine  and  fig 
tree,  the  larger  the  tree  and  the  more  fruitful  the  vine  the  more 
social  power  the  owner  possessed.  "The  conditions  of  human 
life  have  not  only  been  changed,  but  revolutionized,  within  the 
past  few  hundred  years.  In  former  days  there  was  little  dif- 
ference between  the  dwelling,  dress,  food,  and  environment  of 
the  chief  and  of  those  of  his  retainers"3 — but  that  little  differ- 
ence was  all  important. 

Class  distinctions  are  as  clearly  made  today  as  in  the  days 
of  the  noble,  the  bourgeois  and  the  peasant.  But  the  passage 
to-day  is  much  more  rapid  from  a  lower  to  a  higher  social  level 
on  account  of  changed  economic  conditions  which  make  the  ac- 
quirement of  wealth  more  rapid. 

In  early  times  the  display  of  wealth  was  occasional,  but  very 
ostentatious  and  conspicuous.  Wealth  was  expended  on  occa- 

!Ely.     Evolution  of  Industrial  Society,  81-2. 

'Ibid,  478. 

'Carnegie.     The  Gospel  of  Wealth,  1. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  17 

sions  that  partook  of  a  public  or  at  least  of  a  semi-public  char- 
acter, as  weddings,  carnivals,  kirmesses,  the  coming  to  majority. 
The  fondness  for  public  display  is  seen  in  the  small  living  room 
and  the  large  banquet  hall  of  the  feudal  castle.1 

An  article  may  be  a  luxury  at  one  period  and  its  use  and 
possession  a  mark  of  superiority,  while  at  a  later  period  it  has 
become  a  common  necessity  and  of  general  use.  In  the  reign 
of  Henry  IV  of  France  sugar  was  sold  by  the  ounce,  by  the 
apothecary.  Tea  and  coffee  were  at  first  the  luxury  of  the  rich. 
Even  so  common  a  necessity  as  soap  was  the  sole  prerogative 
of  the  man  of  means.  The  use  of  chimneys  in  the  time  of 
King  Alfred  was  considered  as  a  mark  of  distinction  and  to 
use  an  earthen  vessel  instead  of  an  wooden  one  was  a  mark  of 
great  wealth. 

The  development  of  human  wants  has  been  from  the  higher 
classes  to  the  lower.  Utility  has  rarely  been  the  consideration 
at  first.  The  less  useful  an  article  the  sooner  was  it  used  by 
people  of  wealth,  it  had  only  to  bear  the  mark  of  distinction 
and  not  of  necessity.  Tools  were  used  as  ornaments  by  the 
rich,  animals  were  domesticated  for  pets  for  the  well-to-do  and 
not  for  use.  Even  ferocious  animals  were  tamed  to  show 
prowess. 

Even  so  common  articles  as  butter,  milk,  cheese,  bread  and 
cotton  cloth  were  once  considered  as  luxuries  and  were  looked 
upon  as  honorific  articles  of  consumption.  At  first  they  were 
not  prized  for  their  ability  to  satisfy  physical  needs.  When 
they  became  common  they  lost  their  prestige  value.  Cereals 
were  used  to  make  drinks  for  the  well  to  do,  their  dietary  value 
was  recognized  later.2  Art,  law  and  literature  in  early  times 
were  unremunerative  vocations  but  as  soon  as  compensation 
was  given  and  a  professional  class  arose,  such  activities  lost 
their  honorific  quality. 

In  the  early  stage  prowess  wins  and  retains  position  and 
booty,  but  when  the  chieftainship  becomes  hereditary,  a  change 
takes  place.  In  the  patronymic  tribe  the  bond  of  personal  alle- 
giance is  strengthened  while  the  bond  of  kinship  is  weakened. 
"Rank  and  dignity,  even  when  conferred  by  the  suffrages  of 

»Roscher.     Principles  of  Political  Economy,  2:227. 

NOTE — B.  Gurewitsch,  Die  entwicklung  der  Menschlichen  Bidunfinsse  und  die  Sociale 

Gliederung  der  Geselschaft,  is  very  suggestive  on  the  point. 
2Gurewitsch,  20,  58-59. 


18  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

kindred  or  of  political  equals,  are  almost  always  associated  as 
effect  or  as  cause  with  wealth."1  To  the  chieftain  who  tri- 
umphed in  battle  came  the  larger  share  of  the  booty,  with 
this  he  was  able  to  secure  the  service  of  those  who  would  serve 
his  purpose. 

When,  however,  the  relationship  was  metronymic  the  wealth 
of  the  chief  though  large  was  not  of  very  great  power.  When 
kinship,  ancestor  worship  and  wealth  became  combined  and  the 
chieftain's  position  descended  to  the  son  of  a  chief,  such  fami- 
lies were  considered  of  superior  blood.  When  property  as  well 
as  offices  was  inherited  social  power  increased  like  the  prover- 
bial snow-ball. 

Giddings  holds  that,  "probably  all  peoples  have  passed 
through  periods  when  the  social  element  of  wealth  was  the 
supreme  factor  in  securing  favors  and  power.  It  is  disclosed 
in  the  pages  of  the  Odyssey  as  the  social  order  of  the  Greeks 
of  the  Homeric  period.  Tacitus  witnessed  its  beginning  among 
the  Germans,  of  whom  he  says:  'It  is  a  custom  of  the  states 
by  voluntary  and  individual  contributions  to  bestow  on  the 
chiefs  a  present  of  cattle  or  grain,  which  accepted  as  a  compli- 
ment supplies  their  wants.'  From  the  Germans  it  is  learned 
that  the  Saxons,  after  their  conquest  of  England,  passed  through 
the  evolution  of  feudal  agriculture.  'The  ceorle  who  could  ac- 
quire five  hides  of  land,  became  a  thane.  The  thanes  were  the 
immediate  companions  of  the  king — his  commitatus,  and  from 
their  first  appearance  in  English  history,  they  took  rank  above 
the  earlier  nobility  of  Saxon  Earls,  who  were  descended  from 
ancient  tribal  chiefs'."2 

PLACE  SHIFTINGS. 

The  city  affords  a  more  favorable  place  for  the  display  of 
the  social  power  of  wealth  than  does  the  country.  In  the  city 
there  are  varying  grades  of  society  and  the  lines  of  demarcation 
are  more  clearly  drawn  between  the  different  social  strata,  also 
the  city  offers  a  better  opportunity  for  the  use  of  those  goods 
which  indicate  social  position,  as  carriages,  horses,  automobiles, 
dress,  theater  parties  and  entertainments.  The  location  of  a 
person's  home,  on  a  certain  street  or  in  a  particular  part  of  the 
city,  is  a  determinating  factor.  While  the  location  of  a  farm 

Biddings.     Principles  of  Sociology,  293.          2Ibid,  296. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  19 

secures  its  value  largely  from  the  fertility  of  its  soil  and  its 
nearness  to  market. 

Aristocratic  and  Democratic  countries  present  interesting 
fields  for  the  study  of  the  social  power  of  wealth.  In  the  for- 
mer, royalty,  aristocracy,  titled  nobility,  whether  coupled  with 
wealth  (they  invariably  are)  or  not,  enjoy  all  social  prerogatives. 
While  in  the  latter,  as  the  United  States,  where  there  has  been 
a  WEST,  a  frontier,  a  new  area,  new  conditions,  new  types  or 
at  least  old  ones  greatly  modified,  birth  and  position  exercise 
influence  and  wealth  a  greater  power.  The  institutions,  ideas 
and  ideals  of  the  older  civilizntion  have  never  gained  a  firm 
foothold  here.  The  crust  of  custom  has  never  been  very  thick. 

American  society  has  passed  through  progressive  birth  throes. 
Social  equality  and  individualism  have  possessed  great  vitality. 
A  change,  however,  is  taking  place.  There  is  no  more  new  west, 
no  frontier.  The  reaction  has  set  in,  the  rebound  is  taking  place. 
The  wave  of  free  movement  is  breaking  back  on  itself.  Hence- 
forth the  social  power  of  wealth  will  increase  rapidly.  Though 
no  blood  and  titled  aristocracy  has  arisen,  a  plutocracy,  a 
monied  aristocracy  is  arising  and  is  promising  to  be  as  arro- 
gant, haughty  and  aloof,  as  dominant  and  dominating  as  any 
old  world  aristocracy.  It  will  prove  itself  more  powerful  than 
the  old  aristocracy,  for  title,  name,  blood,  family,  were  pass- 
ports to  the  earlier  society,  but  money  is  able  to  ignore  all 
these  and  secure  to  its  possessor  a  passport  to  all  social  dis- 
tinctions and  recognitions  both  at  home  and  abroad.  Wealth 
discounts  inherited  station,  laughs  at  blue  blood,  scoffs  at  titles, 
disdains  first  families. 

Although  this  country  has  been  distinguished  by  the  absence 
of  a  blood  and  titled  aristocracy;  yet  Toryism  and  aristocratic 
life  existed  in  the  south,  large  grants  of  land  made  this  possible, 
the  industrial  system  with  its  plantation  and  slave  labor  was  a 
prominent  factor.  In  the  north  conditions  were  quite  the  op- 
posite, allotments  of  land  were  small,  culture  and  learning  were 
sources  of  social  power.  The  ranch,  the  range,  the  prairie,  the 
forest  and  the  mine  have  produced  their  respective  types  of 
social  leaders. 

In  a  country  where  there  is  royalty  and  an  established  aris- 
tocracy as  in  England,  vastly  more  attention  is  given  to  birth 
and  rank.  The  social  level  of  every  person  is  determined  by 


20  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

his  birth  mark.  A  social  caste  system  is  strenuously  main- 
tained. The  English  scion  not  only  inherits  his  father's  name 
but  much  of  feudalistic  conventions  and  customs.  The  English 
navy  and  army  reserves  its  offices  for  the  sons  of  gentry  and 
the  son  of  the  common  man  is  barred.  The  church  and  the  bar 
are  considered  as  preferred  professions,  close  corporations,  re- 
serves for  the  high  born.  Universities  like  Oxford  and  Cam- 
bridge are  schools  for  gentlemen's  sons.  The  low  born  do  not 
even  aspire  to  the  professions.  But  even  in  England  wealth  is 
rapidly  breaking  down  these  inherited  social  barriers. 

No  country  has  ever  offered  such  social  opportunities  as 
America,  unhampered  by  the  handicap  of  blood  and  title  and 
favored  by  unlimited  opportunities  for  the  acquirement  of 
wealth.  The  clod  of  yesterday  becomes  the  social  lion  of  to- 
day. Wealth  produces  the  Metamorphosis.  Like  a  tidal  wave 
it  sweeps  all  other  social  bars  aside. 


CHAPTER  III. 

DESIRE  AND  IMITATION. 
DESIRE  A  SOCIAL  FORCE. 

The  mainspring  of  all  human  activity  is  desire.  "It  is  ac- 
tual desire  that  controls  the  behavior  of  people."1  "Every  act 
proceeds  from  motive,  and  that  motive  can  be  none  other  than 
the  satisfaction  of  some  want.  The  capacity  to  want  is  planted 
in  the  organic  structures.  It  is  the  necessary  concomitant  of 
the  capacity  to  feel,  *  *  *  desire,  taken  in  its  widest  sense, 
both  positive,  and  negative,  is  the  real  force  in  the  sentient 
world.  It  is  the  dynamic  agent  in  the  animal  world  including 
the  human  sphere  and  therefore  constitutes  the  social  force."2 
Giddings,  true  to  his  Pole  Star,  says:  "The  desire  for  wealth 
originates  in  physical  needs,  but  it  is  powerfully  reinforced  by 
the  consciousness  of  kind  in  the  form  of  a  mastering  wish  to 
emulate,  to  impress  or  to  command  one's  fellow-beings."3 

The  desire  for  wealth  if  not  one  of  the  original  social  forces 

'Ross.     Foundations  of  Sociology,  153.  2Ward.     Outlines  of  Sociology,  144. 

3Giddings.     Principles  of  Sociology,  22- 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  21 

must  be  given  a  very  early  place  in  the  development  of  these 
forces.  It  may  be  derivative  as  Ross  suggests.  It  is  egotic. 
How  this  desire  is  satisfied  is  well  and  compactly  put  by  Ross. 
"There  are  certain  huge  complexes  of  goods  which  serve  a 
means  to  the  satisfaction  of  a  variety  of  wants.  They  are 
Wealth,  Government,  Religion,  and  Knowledge.  In  respect  to 
these  the  various  elemtntary  social  forces  therefore  give  off  im- 
pulses which  run  together  and  form  the  economic,  political,  reli- 
gious, and  intellectual  interests,  which  constitute  in  effect  the 
chief  history-making  forces. 

The  economic  interest  finds  its  tap-root  in  the  pangs  of  hun- 
ger and  cold.  These,  being  a  direct  demand  for  material  goods, 
prompt  men  to  wealth-getting  activities.  There  is,  however, 
in  the  end  no  class  of  cravings  which  may  not  lay  claim  to  goods, 
and  thus  whet  greed  to  a  keener  edge.  When  personal  emula- 
tion takes  the  form  of  'conspicuous  waste/  the  egotic  desires 
prompt  to  acquisition.  When  gold  gilds  the  straitened  fore- 
head of  the  fool,  it  is  prized  as  the  means  of  winning  the  cov- 
eted mate.  WThen  entertainment  is  expensive,  money  is  sought 
to  oil  the  wheels  of  social  intercourse.  When  the  gods  respect 
persons,  men  will  seek  the  wherewithal  for  costly  sacrifices  and 
sanctuaries.  When  wealth  gives  lordship,  the  ambitious  will 
rowel  hard  in  the  pursuit  of  fortune.  When  the  artist  works 
for  the  highest  bidder,  the  beauty-lover  will  set  himself  to 
money-making.  Whenever  Dives  enjoys  greater  social  consi- 
deration, stands  higher  with  the  Unseen,  is  a  more  formidable 
suitor,  finds  bigger  meshes  in  the  law,  and  counts  as  a  worthier 
person  than  the  better  man  with  the  lighter  purse,  all  the 
streams  of  desire  pour  into  one  channel,  and  avarice  swells 
to  monstrous  proportions.  In  general,  the  itch  for  wealth  varies 
directly  with  its  capacity  to  promote  the  satisfaction  of  the 
various  desires."1 

It  must  be  remembered  that  desire  is  a  function  and  not  a 
feeling  and  the  desire  for  the  social  power  which  wealth  gives 
is  strong  and  universal.  Ward  classifies  the  social  forces  into 
two  general  classes:  1.  Essential  Forces.  2.  Non-essential.2 
The  desire  for  the  social  power  of  wealth,  while  it  falls  under 
the  second  class  forms  no  small  part  of  all  human  striving. 

1Ross.     Foundations  of  Sociology,  170-1. 
JWard.     Dynamic  Sociology. 


22  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

IMITATION  A  SOCIAL  FORCE. 

The  desire  for  the  possession  of  the  social  power  of  wealth 
derives  new  and  added  impulse  from  the  imitative  faculty.  The 
desire  to  imitate  those  of  a  higher  social  plane  is  especially 
strong.  "The  desire  to  enjoy  what  others  enjoy  and  the  imi- 
tative tendency  to  act  as  others  act,  are  strong  enough  in  the 
social  individual  to  impel  him  to  pursue  his  material  interests 
as  diligently  as  most  other  individuals  pursue  their  interests. 
This  combination  of  desire  and  diligence  is  the  basis  of  what 
economists  call  a  standard  of  living.  It  is  the  foundation  of 
wealth  and  of  all  individual  advancement."1 

Nitti  believes  that  the  law  of  imitation  has  been  an  im- 
portant factor.  "It  has  been  abundantly  proved  that  one  of 
the  most  imperious  laws  of  society,  the  law  which  has  been  the 
chief  cause  of  progress,  but  which  very  often  is  one  of  the  chief 
causes  of  decadence  is  the  law  of  imitation."2  This  author  be- 
lieves the  giving  of  the  upper  classes  to  luxur)7"  compells  the 
lower  classes  to  follow  them.  That  the  lower  classes  do  imitate 
the  upper  classes  is  undoubtedly  true,  but,  that  they  must  do 
so,  are  "compelled  to,"  is  not  true,  except  that  they  feel  drawn 
to  do  so  by  the  force  which  underlies  the  law  of  imitation. 

Though  imitation  may  lead  to  shams,  to  the  unreal,  to  the 
lack  of  comfort,  yet  the  love  of  conspicuous  display  is  so  strong 
that  it  often  leads  to  the  sacrifice  of  convenience,  comfort  and 
ease  and  even  the  opportunity  for  advancement.  A  good  illus- 
tration of  this  fact  is  found  among  the  middle  class  of  England. 
The  fact  that  a  family  belongs  to  the  middle  class  rather  than 
to  the  class  below,  throws  a  glamour  over  its  entire  existence. 
Even  their  homes  are  built  primarily  to  fulfill  the  rigid  tradi- 
tional requirements.  A  "dining"  room  and  a  "drawing"  room 
are  inevitable  but  a  bath  room  not  at  all  necessary.  Very  few 
books,  some  paper  or  magazine  of  the  upper  classes  is  omni- 
present. A  servant  being  another  necessity,  the  wife  is  "lady- 
like." The  children  must  avoid  the  elementary  school  and  at- 
tend "one  of  these  wretched  dens  of  disorderly  imposture,  a 
middle  class  school,  where  an  absolute  failure  to  train  or  edu- 
cate is  seasoned  with  religious  cant,  lessons  in  piano  playing, 
lessons  in  French  'made  in  England/  mortar  board  caps  for  the 

iQiddings.     Principles  of  Sociology,  123. 

2Nitti.     Population  and  the  Social  System,  103. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  23 

boys/'  and  a  high  social  tone.  Perhaps  the  point  which  most 
emphasises  the  social  position  of  this  "bookless,  bathless  family" 
is  the  fact  that  it  TIPS.1  Gurewitsch  relates  that  "Emigres" 
of  the  higher  classes  of  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution  would 
go  hungry  rather  than  give  up  giving  tips,  "mancher  thaler  ist 
schon  fur  trink  geld  verwandt  worden,  den  der  Besitzer  im 
stillen  gern  fur  eine  gute  Mahlzeit  ausgeben  hatte."2 

All  this  is  imitation  of  the  rich.  In  a  town  of  a  middle  west 
state  which  has  a  population  of  some  6,000,  there  are  owned 
fifty  automobiles  representing  an  expenditure  of  $60,000,  or 
nearly  $10  for  every  man,  woman  and  child.  More  than  one 
of  the  owners  of  these  machines  placed  a  mortgage  on  his  home 
to  be  able  to  make  the  purchase.  The  machine  is  seen,  the 
mortgage  is  not. 

So  strong  and  general  has  become  the  disposition  to  imitate 
those  of  a  higher  social  class  level  that  commercialism 
has  made  great  use  of  the  same.  Goods  are  made  and 
sold  for  29c  on  the  bargain  counter  that  look  exactly 
like  goods  sold  on  another  counter  for  $2.00.  The  com- 
mon people  buy  the  29c  in  order  that  they  may  appear 
like  those  that  wear  the  $2.00  goods.  Plated  ware  is  sub- 
stituted for  the  solid  metal,  plaster  of  Paris  for  solid  marble, 
cotton  velvet  for  silk  velvet,  colored  prints  and  cheap  lithographs 
for  masterpieces,  shoddy  for  wool,  veneer  for  solid  oak.  After 
1760  in  France  paper  hangings  were  substituted  for  costly"gobe- 
lins,  tapestry  and  leather  hangings." 

Not  to  imitate,  too  often  means  social  ostracism.  "Now  the 
desire  to  do  as  others  do  affects  even  the  inner  life;  one  must 
play  the  same  game  and  must  read  the  same  novel,  not  because 
one  thinks  it  is  better,  but  because  others  do  it,  and  because  one 
feels  in  inner  accord  with  the  social  community  only  by  loving 
and  hating  the  same  things  as  it.  Those  who  do  not  like  what 
others  like,  find  themseles  extremists  at  once;  they  are  in- 
stinctively held  off  by  society  as  bizarre  or  over  intense,  and 
relegated  to  the  social  periphery."3 

1  Wells.     Mankind  in  the  Making,  158-159. 
2Gurewitsch.     Die  Entwicklung  der  Menschlichen,  etc. 
3Munsterberg.     The  Americans,  554. 


24  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

CHAPTER  IV. 


SOURCES  OF  ARISTOCRACY. 

DIRECT  SOURCES. 

The  Standard  Dictionary  defines  aristocracy  as,  "A  heredit- 
ary nobility,  a  class  or  order  possessed  of  prescriptive  rights  and 
rank,"  also  "a  class  of  persons  pre-eminent  by  reason  of  birth, 
wealth,  or  culture."1 

While  aristocracy  originates  from  birth,  yet  if  it  were  not 
recruited  from  other  sources  it  would  soon  die  out.  Aristocracy 
is  not  prolific  in  off-spring,  it  tends  toward  sterility.  Of  the 
prominent  families  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  of  England, 
all  have  become  extinct  within  300  years. 

The  sources  of  aristocracy  may  be  divided  into  two  general 
classes.  1.  Direct.  2.  Indirect.  Under  the  first  comes  birth, 
this  is  the  most  direct  and  certain  for  it  at  once  and  absolutely 
fixes  a  person's  social  position.  Closely  allied  with  birth  is  the 
second  direct  source,  marriage.  In  case  of  the  woman  she  takes 
rank  with  her  husband,  and  in  case  of  the  man  special  provi- 
sion for  his  rank  is  usually  made  and  the  social  status  of  the 
offspring  is  fixed.  The  law  of  Hammurabi  presents  an  interesting 
feature  in  this  respect.  "If  either  the  slave  of  the  palace  or 
the  slave  of  the  poor  man  has  taken  to  wife  the  daughter  of  a 
gentleman,  and  she  has  borne  sons,  the  owner  of  the  slave  shall 
have  no  claim  on  the  sons  of  the  daughter  of  a  gentleman  for 
servitude."2 

INDIRECT  SOURCES. 

Among  the  indirect  sources  culture  has  been  a  fecund  source. 
Men  of  learning  have  always  secured  social  recognition.  Learn- 
ing has  proved  an  unfailing  passport  to  the  ranks  and  privileges 
of  nobility.  Among  the  Romans  of  the  third  century,  "high 
intellectual  culture  was  *  *  *  the  indispensible  mark  of  a 
well-born  man;  it  was  the  best  ground  for  public  office  and  ad- 
vancemtnt.  An  advocate  of  the  fisc,  a  secretary  of  the  chancery 
or  a  pretorian  prefect  had  to  be,  first  of  all,  a  man  of  letters."3 

The  University  teachers  of  this  time  were  men  of  means, 

JThe  Standard  Dictionary.  2Code  of  Hammurabi,  175,  law  36. 

8Munro  and  Sillery.     Medieval  Civilization,  6. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  25 

some  inherited  their  wealth  and  others  acquired  it  from  their 
profession.  These  men  were  exempt  from  taxes.  "As  members 
of  the  curia,  decurions  and  magistrates  they  were  in  the  first 
rank  of  the  local  aristocracy.  Some  *  *  *  attracted  the 
attention  of  the  emperor,  became  provincial  governors  and  pre- 
torian  prefects  and  even  attained  the  lofty  though  barren  honor 
of  the  consulship."1 

The  same  was  true  in  early  English  law,  (7)  "and  if  there  a 
scholar  were  who  through  learning  thrived  so  that  he  had  holy 
orders,  and  served  Christ;  then  was  he  henceforth  of  rank  and 
power  so  much  worthy."2 

The  intellectual  interest,  though  single  in  its  early  stages,  be- 
comes complex  and  passes  through  a  period  of  evolution.  "This 
intellectual  interest  is  likewise  a  blend  of  desires.  Had  it  been 
restricted  to  its  primitive  components,  its  role  would  have  been 
significant.  But  these  cravings  have  been  reinforced  from  sev- 
eral quarters.  In  the  first  place,  intellectual  subtlety,  always 
a  coveted  form  of  prowess,  gratifies  the  egotic  desires.  Even 
in  the  early  stages  of  culture  a  reputation  for  extraordinary 
wisdom  gives  the  sage  fame,  power,  and  wealth.  Later,  learn- 
ing confers  distinction  and  is  not  without  efficacy  in  bread-win- 
ning and  mate  winning.  At  every  social  level,  moreover,  there  is 
a  standard  of  intelligence  to  be  lived  up  to  as  well  as  a  standard 
of  decent  consumption.  As  for  real  knowledge,  it  has  always 
been  a  means  as  well  as  an  end.  The  sciences  were  first  culti- 
vated as  badges  of  the  leisure-class  superiority.  Later  they  were 
fostered  because  they  allayed  the  dread  of  disease,  banished  fear 
of  the  supernatural,  assuaged  pain,  prolonged  life,  brought  vic- 
tory, and  vastly  expanded  the  production  of  wealth.  They  were 
cultivated  in  short,  because  knowledge  is  power.  Knowledge 
and  money,  in  other  words,  Science  and  Wealth,  seem  likely 
to  become  the  heirs  of  the  dying  powers  of  the  past."3  One 
has  but  to  call  to  mind  the  intellectual  giants  of  the  past  and 
note  the  conspicuous  place  that  they  have  held  in  the  esteem 
of  men,  in  order  to  comprehend  the  power  of  culture  and  also 
that  it  has  been  the  fertile  soil  out  of  which  men  have  sprung 
who  later  were  enrolled  among  the  aristocracy. 

1Munro  and  Sillery,  Medieval  Civilization,  14. 

2S terns.     Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England,  11. 

3Ross.     Foundations  of  Sociology,  178-9. 


26  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

Closely  allied  with  culture,  in  fact  a  part  of  it,  is  refinement 
of  manners,  gentility  of  conduct,  grace  of  movement  and  charm 
of  personality.  These  characteristics  are  a  source  of  recogni- 
tion. Taine  relates  how,  "the  Marchale  de  Luxembourg,  so 
high  spirited,  always  selects  La  Harpe  as  her  cavalier,  because 
he  offers  his  arm  so  well."1  When  ability  and  refinement  are 
having  prestige,  nobility  will  receive  and  entertain  such,  though 
not  of  blood  and  purse.  Voltaire  son  of  a  notary,  Diderot  son 
of  a  culter,  Rousseau  son  of  a  watch  maker  and  d'  Albembert 
a  foundling  of  a  glazier  were  entertained  by  nobility  and  en- 
joyed the  social  favors  which  birth  could  have  given.2  This 
source  of  social  recognition  is  a  precarious  one  for  as  Taine  says, 
"the  more  polished  an  aristocracy  becomes,  the  weaker  it  be- 
comes, and  when  no  longer  possessing  the  power  to  please  it  no 
longer  possesses  power  to  struggle."3 

PERSONAL  PAVOR  AND  SERVICE. 

The  personal  favor  of  a  prince,  potentate,  or  a  social  leader 
may  elevate  the  most  humble  person  to  the  loftiest  plane  of 
aristocracy.  The  aristocracy  of  VII  Century  was  composed  of 
those  who  performed  public  functions.  The  "Chroniques"  and 
"Vies  de  Saints"  speak  often  of  the,  "optimates"  and  "pro- 
ceres",  also,  Or  ces  terms  sont  ceux  qui  depuis  PEmpire  roman 
designaient  ceux  qui  etaient  grands  par  la  faveur  du  prince  ou 
par  les  fonctions  qu'ils  remplissaient  aupres  de  lui."4  This 
same  class  of  writers  frequently  employ  the  term  "nobilis"  as 
if  it  represented  a  person  of  high  birth,  but  such  did  not  seem  to 
be  the  case.  La  classe  des  optimates  ou  des  grands  n'existe 
que  dans  le  Palais.5  The  term  "nobilis"  was  not  found  in  the 
official  acts.  Dans  aucun  de  ces  nombreux  documents  on  ne 
trouve  le  moindre  indice  d'une  vieille  noblesse  de  naissance."6 

The  chroniclers  of  the  time  speak  of  many  noble  who  served 
the  king.  Of  these  Fustel  de  Coulanges  remarks:  En  regard  de 
ces  examples  et  de  beaucoup  d'autres  semblable,  nous  n'  aper- 
cevons  pas  une  seule  fois  un  homme  dont  il  soit  dit  qu'il  est 
noble  et  qu'il  vit  en  dehors  des  fonctions  publiques.  Les 
"nobles"  du  VII  siecle  ne  sont  done  pas  autres  que  les  grands 


Ancient  Regime,  213.  2Ibid  (first  page).  3Ibid,  165. 

4Fustel  de  Coulanges,  Les  Transformations  de  la  Royaute,  chap.  6,  61. 
'Ibid,  61.  "ibid,  62. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  27 

du  Palais  et  les  hauts  fonctionnaires  de  roi.  II  existe  une 
noblesse  palatine;  on  ne  voit  pas  d'autre  noblesse.  Un  hagio- 
graphe  nous  dit  expressement  que  la  noblesse  est  la  parente 
avec  les  grands  de  la  cour.1 

This  same  writer  cites  a  long  list  of  families  all  of  whom 
enjoyed  the  favor  of  the  king.  And  it  was  not  long  before 
this  favor  became  a  family  prerogative  and  assumed  an  here- 
ditary character,  for  at  the  death  of  the  "pere"  the  "fils"  suc- 
ceeded to  the  place  and  honor  and  emoluments  which  the  father 
had  held.  Nons  ne  voyons  pas,  au  VII  siecle,  I'hereditS  des 
fonctions  qui  s'  s'etablira  deux  siecles  plus  tard;  mais  nons 
voyons  des  families  qui  de  pere  en  fils  se  perpetuent  dans  le 
Palais  et  s'en  partagent  les  fonctions  et  les  profits.  Telle  etait 
Paristocratle  du  VII  sie"cle,  elle  n'  etait  autre  que  la  hierarchic 
des  fonctionnaires  jointe  a'  P  episcopat.  Elle  etait  le  Palais, 
individuellement,  chaque  membre  etait  riche  en  terre,  eleve  on 
dignite,  puissant  par  sa  fonction  chef  absolu  d'  un  territoire  et 
d'um  part  de  peuple.  Tous  ensemble,  ils  fro  maient  un  corps 
tres  forte ment  constitue  autour  de  la  royaute,  mais  plus  fort 
qu'elle.2 

In  explaining  the  theory  of  government,  Murdock3  shows 
how  in  an  early  stage  of  civilization,  a  ruler  or  governor  is 
needed.  That  a  man  of  leadership,  ability  or  of  prowess  is 
selected.  That  such  a  ruler  is  despotic  and  in  the  absence  of 
a  written  constitution,  the  rule  of  the  monarch  is  arbitrary. 
That  this  ruler  necessarily  needs  helpers  and  he  associates  with 
him  the  noble  and  from  these  there  arises  an  aristocracy. 

In  an  earlier  time  to  which  Murdock  refers,  men  of  fighting 
strength  and  warlike  disposition  are  selected..  Occasions  for 
leaders  become  so  frequent  as  to  be  constant  and  the  leader 
who  is  retained,  tends  to  become  hereditary,  "as  in  the  case  of 
the  house  of  David,  simply  because  the  king's  house  naturally 
becomes  greater  and  richer  than  other  houses  and  so  better  able 
to  sustain  the  burden  of  power."4 

Emerton5  holds  that  "nobility  consisted  primarily  of  two  dis- 
tinct qualities;  first,  the  hereditary  possession  of  a  higher  es- 
tate, which  carried  with  it  the  obligation  to  the  higher  forms 

1Fustel  de  Coulanges.     Les  Transformations  de  la  Royaute,  chap.  6,  63. 

'Ibid,  76-78. 

3Murdock.     A  History  of  Constitutional  Reform,  9. 

'Smith.     Religion  of  the  Semites,  34.  ^Emerton.     Medieval  Europe,  486-7. 


28  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

of  service,  and  second,  the  fitness  for  military  service,  the  che- 
valerie.  *  *  *  For  in  case  a  person  desired  to  enter  such  a 
service,  he  must  possess  wealth  sufficient  to  furnish  the  very 
expensive  equipment  necessary  to  the  duty  of  the  cavilier." 
Thus  was  secured  to  the  lord  an  ,  "elite  corps  of  fighting  men, 
and  naturally  in  semi-barbaric  society,  this  select  group  and 
their  families  formed  the  highest  aristocracy  and  the  dominant 
force  in  society."2  The  chevalerie  mounted  on  a  steed,  like 
himself  protected  by  armour  was  superior  to  many  times  his 
number  of  unmounted  and  unarmoured  men  and  all  this  added 
to  the  strength  and  prestige  of  the  chevalerie  and  his  lord. 

RELIGION.1 

No  other  source  has  produced  a  class  which  enjoys  such 
privilege  and  immunity  as  religion.  This  is  especially  true  of 
the  religions  of  India,  where  passage  from  one  class  to  another 
is  almost  impossible.  In  the  code  of  Manu  this  is  well  illus- 
trated for  the  person  twice  born  (religiously)  became  superior 
and  enjoyed  opportunities  and  favors  not  possible  to  one  not 
so  promoted. 

In  France  the  bishop  and  high  church  officials  were  in  the 
royal  tribunal  and  were  not  chosen  from  rank  of  the  clergy  by 
voie  d'election  cononique.  They  often  belonged  to  the  Palais 
and  received  their  office  from  the  king.  Le  Palais  faisait  les 
eveques,  et  les  eVeques  continuaient  a  former  une  pairtie  du 
Palais.2 

WEALTH  AS  A  SOURCE. 

Birth  is  a  sure  and  safe  passport  to  the  ranks  of  aristocracy. 
Culture,  refinement,  learning,  personal  favor,  military  achieve- 
ment, each  or  all  may  bear  its  owner  safely  across  the  social 
gulf,  but  many  times  there  is  ship-wreck  in  the  passage.  Next 
to  birth  itself,  stands  WEALTH  as  the  safest,  surest  and  swiftest 
bark  to  the  haven  of  social  prestige.  /*'  The  heroes  of  the  Homeric 
poems  are  not  only  valiant  but  wealthy.  The  warriors  of  the 
Nibelungen-Lied  are  not  only  noble  but  rich.  In  the  later 
Greek  literature  we  find  pride  of  birth  identified  with  pride  in 
seven  wealthy  ancestors  in  succession."3  "The  advantage  se- 

lTbis  subject  is  treated  more  fully  in  Part  II. 
2Fustel  de  Coulanges.     Transformations,  etc.,  67. 
'Maine.     Early  Institutions,  134. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  29 

cured  by  blood  does  not,  you  see,  exclude  respect  for  wealth 
but  works  for  it.  'He  is  an  inferior  chief/  says  the  'Senchus 
Mor/  whose  father  was  not  a  chief.  The  primary  view  of  the 
chieftainship  is  evidently  that  it  springs  from  purity  or  dignity 
of  blood,  but  noble  birth  is  regarded  as  naturally  associated  with 
wealth,  and  he  who  becomes  rich  gradually  climbs  to  position 
indistinguishable  from  that  which  .he  would  have  occupied  if 
he  had  been  nobly  born."1 

The  possession  of  wealth  greatly  enhanced  the  Roman  and 
paved  his  way  to  the  aristocratic  class.  Wealth  enabled  him  to 
secure  a  house  of  large  proportions,  to  furnish  it  luxuriously, 
decorate  its  walls  and  halls  with  costly  works  of  art;  to  surround 
his  house  with  spacious  and  well  kept  grounds.  He  had  time 
for  leisure  and  for  hunting.  His  house  became  a  castle  and  the 
castle  a  fortress — the  only  secure  place.  In  the  fourth  century 
the  nobility  possessed  much  of  Roman  land,  the  higher  nobility 
holding  the  most.  Landed  property  became  the  source  of  wealth 
and  power  and  the  most  honorable  of  riches.2  "The  senatorial 
aristocracy  was  powerful  through  its  riches,  its  local  attach- 
ments and  its  independence.3  From  this  class  arose  an  aristo- 
cracy nearly  independent  of  the  emperor."  In  the  Republic 
rank  was  determined  by  wealth.  One  line  of  demarkation  lay 
between  those  who  owned  land  and  those  who  did  not.  The 
former  were  assedui,  house  holders,  rooted  in  the  soil.  The 
latter  were  proletarians.  The  proletarians  were  unequal  in  their 
wealth  and  were  consequently  divided  into  five  classes.  Among 
these  categories  all  were  unequal,  in  taxes,  military  service,  and 
political  rights. 

Early  English  law  favored  wealth. 

(1)  It  was  whilom,  in  the  laws  of  the  English  that  people 
and  law  went  by  ranks,  and  then  were  the  counselors  of  the 
nation  of  worship,  each  according  to  his  condition,  "eorl"  and 
"ceorl,"  "thegen"  and  "theoden." 

(2)  Arid  if  an  " ceorl"  thrived,  so  that  he  had  fully  five  hides 
of  his  own  land,  church  and  kitchen,  bell-house  and    "birh," 
gate-seat,  and  special  duty  in  the  king's'hall,  then  was  he  thence- 
forth of  the  thane-right  worthy. 

(3)  And  if  a  thane  thrive,  so  that  he  serve  the  king  and  on 

^aine/Earlyrlnstitutions,  136. 

and  Sellery.     Medieval  Civilization,  18.  »Ibid,  21. 


30  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

his  summon,  ride  among  his  household;  if  he  then  had  a  thane 
who  him  followed,  who  to  the  king's  "ut-ware,"  five  hides  had, 
and  in  the  king's  hall  served  his  lord,  and  thrice  with  his  errand 
went  to  the  king,  he  might  thenceforth,  with  his  "fore  oath," 
his  lord  represent,  at  various  needs,  and  his  plaint  lawfully  con- 
duct, wheresoever  he  ought.1 

No  change  took  place  at  a  later  date  for  wealth  gave  to  the 
son  of  a  London  apothecary  the  title  of  Northumberland;  to  the 
son  of  a  woolstapler,  earl  of  Warwick.  The  earldom  of  Essex 
was  founded  by  a  draper  and  that  of  Craven  by  a  merchant 
tailor.2 

Taine  found  in  France,  in  1789,  three  classes  of  persons,  the 
clergy,  the  nobles  and  the  king,  occupying  the  most  prominent 
position  in  the  state,  with  all  the  advantages  which  it  com- 
ports; namely,  authority,  privileges,  immunities,  favors,  pen- 
sions, preferences  and  the  like.  This  author  gives  this  classifi- 
cation of  the  population.  Of  the  26,000,000,  the  above  named 
classes  numbered  270,000,  25,000  to  30,000  noble  families,  23,- 
000  Monks  in  2,500  monasteries,  37,000  nuns  in  1,500  convents, 
60,000  curates  and  vicars  in  as  many  churches  and  chapels. 
There  was  one  noble  family  to  1,000  population.  One-fifth  of 
the  property  (land)  belonged  to  the  crown  and  the  communes, 
one-fifth  to  the  third  estate,  one-fifth  to  the  rural  population, 
one-fifth  to  the  nobles,  and  one-fifth  to  the  clergy.  Through 
wealth  successful  men  as  magistrates  and  financiers,  acquired 
or  purchased  nobility.3 

Higginson  shows  the  loss  of  prestige  to  birth,  " blood,  pride 
of  race,  what  are  these?  Where  are  they  nowadays?  Money, 
above  all  the  willingness  to  entertain,  these  are  the  pass-keys, 
to  what  was  once  a  fortress  to  be  entered  by  birth  and  by  birth 
alone."4  So  strong  has  become  the  rule  of  wealth  that  Bodley 
says,  "the  rule  of  wealth  is  upsetting  most  of  the  theories  of 
political  philosophers  and  becoming  so  omnipotent  that  the  so- 
cial composition  of  the  communities  under  its  sway  is  more  af- 
fected by  it  than  by  the  regime  of  the  state,  republican,  or 
monarchial,  constitutional  or  arbitrary."5 

'Sterns.     Germs  and  Development,  116-117. 

'Champlain.     The  Manufacture  of  Ancestors.     Forum,  10:568. 

'Taine.     Ancient  Regime,  13. 

<Higginson.     The  Aristocracy  of  the  Dollar.     Atlantic  Monthly,  93:507. 

'Bodley.     France,  1:200. 


WEALTH    AND    SOCIAL    PRESTIGE  31 

It  should  also  be  noted  that  the  source  from  which  wealth 
is  secured  makes  much  difference  in  the  amount  and  kind  of 
social  prestige  that  it  yields.  In  some  countries  inherited  wealth 
secures  more  social  favors  than  the  same  amount  of  wealth 
earned.  "Travelers  tell  us  of  an  instance  in  Scotland  where, 
at  a  dinner  party,  an  upper  servant  was  sent  round  before  hand 
to  inquire  how  many  acres  of  land  each  guest  had  INHERITED, 
so  that  they  might  be  arranged  at  the  table  in  their  proper  or- 
der."1 

"In  Germany  or  France,  the  man  looks  on  a  wealthy  mar- 
riage as  one  of  the  most  reliable  means  of  getting  an  income; 
there  are  whole  professions  which  depend  on  a  man's  eking  out 
his  entirely  inadequate  salary  from  property  which  he  inherits 
or  gets  by  marriage."2  This  author  thinks  that  Americans  de- 
spise this  kind  of  money-getting  as  they  do  money  obtained 
from  a  lottery.  "The  Frenchman  prizes  money  as  such;  if  he 
can  get  it  without  labor,  by  inheritance  or  dowry,  or  by  gam- 
bling, so  much  the  better."3 

While  Americans  are  not  so  particular  as  to  the  source  of 
one's  fortune  yet  they  do  give  to  wealth  that  has  age  more  dig- 
nity. When  Theodore  Parker  visited  Cincinnati,  at  that  time, 
the  recognized  leader  among  western  cities,  he  said  that  he  had 
made  a  great  discovery,  namely,  that  while  the"  aristocracy  of 
Cincinnati  was  unquestionably  founded  on  pork,  it  made  a  great 
difference,  whether  a  man  killed  pigs  for  himself  or  whether  his 
father  had  killed  them.  The  one  was  held  plebian,  the  other 
patrician.  It  was  the  difference,  Parker  said,  between  'the 
stick  'ems  and  the  stuck  'ems.'4 

Guyau  gives  to  wealth  a  greater  power  than  many  at  least 
to-day  are  willing  to  grant  it.  Discussing  the  mixture  of  races 
he  quotes  M.  Renan,  who  believes  that  the  Chinese  will  become 
the  future  slave  of  the  European.  Guyau  points  out  that  "the 
gentle,  docile  Chinese  slaves  are  also  excellent  instruments  of 
war,"  and  then  adds,  "in  the  industrial  society  in  which  we  live 
money  constitutes  in  the  long  run,  the  basis  of  aristocracy. 
To-day  money  is  the  true  force  and  title  of  nobility.  To  lay  up 
treasures  demands  a  very  average  intelligence  of  which  a  great 

^igginson.     The  Aristocracy  of  the  Dollar.     Atlantic  Monthly,  93,  51. 

2Munsterberg.     The  Americans,  231.  3Ibid,  234. 

4Higginson.     The  Aristocracy  of  the  Dollar.     Atlantic  Monthly,  93,  510. 


32  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

number  of  inferior  people  are  no  doubt  capable.  Once  rich  and 
they  will  be  our  equals;  richer  they  will  be  our  superiors  and 
our  masters.  If  they  can  have  money  enough  they  can  pur- 
chase every  privilege,  even  that  of  mixing  their  blood  with 
ours,  even  the  marrying  of  our  daughters  and  of  confounding 
our  race  and  theirs."1 

!Guyau.     The  Non-Religions  of.  the  Future,  321. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION 


PART  II. 


WEALTH  AND  RELIGION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Do  ut  Des,  Facio  ut  Facias. 
THE  SIGNIFICANCE  OF  RITES. 

Non-economic  wealth  has  ever  been  an  important  factor  in 
the  realm  of  religion  —  both  pagan  and  Christian.  Much  has 
been  written  about  man's  religious  nature,  his  methods  of  wor- 
ship, but  not  so  much  attention  has  been  given  to  the  meaning 
of  certain  institutions  and  practices  and  the  part  that  non- 
economic  wealth  has  played  in  the  religious  life  and  practice 
of  man.  "In  connection  with  every  religion,  whether  ancient 
or  modern,  we  find  on  the  one  hand  certain  beliefs,  and  on  the 
other  certain  institutions,  ritual  practices  and  rules  of  conduct. 
Our  modern  habit  is  to  look  at  religion  from  the  side  of  belief 
rather  than  of  practice."1  In  consequence  of  this,  the  rise  and 
significance  of  certain  forms  of  ritualistic  service  and  places  of 
worship  and  their  adornment  have  been  ignored. 

In  discussing  the  place  of  mythology  in  ancient  religion, 
Smith  finds  that  it  was  the  exact  performance  of  sacred  rites, 
regularly  and  accurately  which  was  obligatory  and  meritorious, 
no  matter  what  the  worshipper  believed  or  practiced.2  Miiller 
holds  that  religion  is  as  old  as  the  world,  and  that  earliest  man 
was  possessed  by  religious  ideas  and  that  he  early  developed 
religious  forms.3 

Custom,  form  and  precedent  have  always  been  held  sacred 
and  closely  followed  by  primitive  people.  "The  rules  of  society 
were  based  on  precedent,  and  the  continued  existence  of  the  so- 
ciety was  sufficient  reason  why  a  precedent  once  set  should  con- 
tinue to  be  followed."4  Samuel  Ives  Curtiss,  who  has  made  a 
careful  and  personal  investigation  of  the  religion  of  the  Semites 


Religion  of  the  Semites,  17.  2Ibid,  19. 

3Muller.     Origin  of  Religions,  15. 
4Smith,  Religion  of  the  Semites,  22. 


34  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

of  to-day,  says  the  Semites  have  suffered  but  little  if  any  change 
by  Judaism,  Christianity  or  Islam.  "The  tenacity  with  which 
the  Oriental  mind  if  left  to  itself,  holds  that  which  has  always 
been,  and  turns  to  it  as  unerringly  as  the  needle  to  the  pole, 
has  been  often  observed,  and  is  our  guaranty  that  we  may  find 
primitive  religious  conditions  among  people  with  whom,  if  we 
approach  them  in  the  right  way,  we  may  hold  intercourse  to- 
day." "To  the  Arab  or  Syrian,  custom,  is  mightier  than  right; 
indeed  custom  is  the  only  right  he  knows.  Both  morality  and 
religion  depend  upon  it.  The  heavens  might  sooner  fall  than 
custom  be  set  aside.  If  we  can  get  at  the  usage  of  the  Semites 
we  shall  know  what  his  religion  is."1 

Religion  in  these  early  times  was  largely  a  matter  of  birth 
and  one  unconsciously  followed  through  life  the  habits  and 
practices  of  the  religion  into  which  he  was  born  just  as  he  fell 
into  the  ways  of  the  social  and  political  life  about  him.  "Reli- 
gion did  not  exist  for  the  saving  of  souls  but  for  the  preservation 
and  welfare  of  society."  Hence,  every  man  was  expected  to 
conform  to  the  general  practice  of  his  fellowmen.  "Every  so- 
cial act  had  reference  to  the  gods  as  well  as  to  men,  for  the 
social  body  was  not  made  up  of  men  only,  but  of  gods  and 
men."2  Only  those  of  the  same  kin  could  worship  together  for 
such  were  supposed  to  be  of  the  same  blood.  It  was  held  that 
in  some  way  the  god  was  related  to  the  kin  by  a  blood-bond. 

At  first  the  individual  was  of  little  importance  for  "  in  anti- 
quity all  religion  was  the  affair  of  the  community  rather  than 
of  the  individual.  A  sacrifice  was  a  public  ceremony  of  a  town- 
ship or  of  a  clan."3  "The  benefits  which  were  expected  from 
the  gods  were  of  a  public  character  affecting  the  whole  com- 
munity, especially  fruitful  seasons,  increase  of  flocks  and  herds, 
and  success  in  war."4  And  it  was  a  national,  not  a  personal 
providence  that  was  taught  by  ancient  religion.5 

iCurtiss.     Primitive  Semitic  Religions  To-Day,  65. 
2See  Smith.     Religion  of  the  Semites,  23,  30,  31. 
'Ibid,  236.  "Ibid,  24.  &Ibid,  246. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  35 


CHAPTER  II. 


PRIMITIVE  CONCEPTION  OF  NATURE  AND  ITS  RELA- 
TION TO  SACRIFICE. 

ORIGIN  OP  SACRIFICE. 

Primitive  man  believes  that  all  things  possess  life.  To  him 
whatever  moves  has  life,  as*  trees,  plants,  streams  of  water  and 
flames  of  fire.  It  is  his  creed  that  over  these  there  is  a  super- 
natural force  with  which  it  is  an  advantage  for  man  to  sustain 
friendly  relations.1  Pliney  taught  that  trees  had  souls,  that 
they  were  the  temples  of  the  spirits.  The  oak  was  specially 
protected  by  Jupiter,  the  laurel  by  Apollo,  the  olive  by  Minerva, 
the  myrtle  by  Venus  and  the  poplar  by  Hercules.  This  belief 
led  to  the  placing  of  sacrifices  in  the  trees  for  the  spirits. 
"To  fell  a  tree  of  the  forest  was  regarded  as  an  'offense 
against  the  sanctity'  of  the  forest.  The  Roman  farmer  would 
sacrifice  a  pig  to  the  spirit  of  the  woods — be  it  god  or  goddess — 
before  he  began  to  thin  it."2 

Primitive  man  also  believes  that  to  break  the  sod,  reclaim 
waste  land  or  in  any  way  disturb  these  spirit  owners  or  to  tres- 
pass upon  their  domains  makes  necessary  a  solemn  sacrifice. 
The  legend  of  the  death  of  Remus  is  a  case  in  point.3 

The  Ancient  Persians,  Hindoos  and  Early  people  of  Mexico, 
attributed  the  diminishing  fertility  of  the  soil  to  the  displeasure 
of  the  spirits  and  so  offered  large  sacrifices  to  appease  them  and 
win  their  favor.4 

Whenever  an  event  was  difficult  to  explain  or  had  a  mys- 
terious air  it  was  attributed  to  the  action  of  some  particular 
spirit.  From  this  conception  arose  many  rites  and  feasts. 

The  helplessness  and  ignorance  of  primitive  man  made  him 
both  superstitious  and  religious.  This  accounts  for  the  univer- 
sal practice  of  sacrifice.  He  possessed  but  little,  he  knew  noth- 
ing of  the  future,  his  fortune  was  most  fickle  yet  he  acted  much 

1Jevons.     An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Religion,  21. 
2Granger.     The  Worship  of  the  Romans,  95-96. 
'Rouse.     Greek  Votive  Offering,  39  ff. 
4Payne.     History  of  the  New  World,  Called  America,  474. 


36  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

the  same  as  if  he  had  a  larger  knowledge  and  fortune  was  always 
kind  to  him.  Jevons  gives  this  explanation.  "It  is  a  fact  of 
psychology  that  the  native  tendency  of  the  human  mind  to  be- 
lieve that  what  has  once  happened  will  happen  again  is  so  strong 
that,  until  experience  has  corrected  it,  a  single  occurrence  is 
sufficient  to  create  an  expectation  of  re-occurrence;  the  child  to 
whom  you  have  given  sweet  meats  once  fully  expects  sweet 
meats  from  you  again  at  the  next  meeting."1  If  offering  was 
made  and  good  fortune  followed  once — why  not  again? 

Loria  states  that  moral  force  is  essentially  psychic  in  char- 
acter. The  psychological  influences  surrounding  isolated  and  co- 
actively  associated  labor  may  be  reduced  to  the  following:  a. 
Labor  whose  productivity  either  on  account  of  lack  of  associa- 
tion, or  of  inability  to  dominate  matter  completely,  finds  itself 
accordingly  unable  to  effectually  control  the  forces  of  nature. 
b.  This  with  the  unconscious  character  of  the  social  relation 
surrounding  the  individual,  determines  a  sort  of  obsession  of 
the  mental  faculties  and  engenders  a  feeling  of  degradation  and 
impotence,  because  he,  as  an  individual  feels  himself  the  victim 
of  social  forces  of  whose  ulterior  tendencies  he  is  ignorant  and 
whose  process  he  is  unable  to  control. 

From  these  considerations  there  arises  the  conception  of  the 
supernatural.  Man  feels  that  over  and  above  him  is  a  force 
hostile  to  him.  Also  that  this  force  emanates  from  a  will  stronger 
than  his  own.  To  overcome  this  hostile  force  and  make  nature 
yield  abundantly  man  must  offer  prayers  and  offerings.2 

Since  success  depended  upon  the  favor  of  the  gods  and  mis- 
fortune was  due  to  the  god's  displeasure,  it  behooved  man  to 
maintain  a  good  standing  with  them.  This  was  done  in  two 
ways.  1.  By  banishing  or  compelling.  2.  By  propitiative  acts. 
The  first  was  accomplished  by  some  simple  means  as  the  use 
of  fire  or  water.  It  was  believed  that  streams  of  water  and  fire 
were  impassable  barriers.  The  making  of  loud  noises  was  also 
considered  helpful  to  drive  the  evil  spirits  away.  It  was  con- 
sidered fatal  to  fight  with  the  gods.  "Short  lived  are  those 
who  fight  with  gods."3  Yet  others  made  efforts  to  drive  away 
evil  spirits  by  the  use  of  physical  force.  The  Guaycurus  of 

Sevens.     An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Religion. 
2Loria.     The  Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  22. 
'Keller.     Homeric  Society,  115. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  37 

Paraguay  rush  with  shouts  and  brandishing  clubs  to  meet  the 
oncoming  storm.     The  Mayas  of  Yucatan  perform  similar  acts.1 

While  during  the  earlier  stage  the  existence  and  assistance 
of  the  spirits  are  recognized  and  without  favor  and  aid  of  these 
spirits  success  is  not  possible,  in  the  latter  stage,  the  gods  are 
made  the  principal  personages  of  the  community.  "They  are 
in  it  and  of  it;  they  are  its  most  important  members.  They 
are  bound  to  their  human  neighbors  by  mutual  obligations." 
With  these  gods  a  covenant  is  made.  This  covenant  founded 
upon  religion  becomes  the  foundation  of  civilization.  This  cov- 
enant included  "Mutual  services:  Do  ut  Des,  Facio  ut  Facias."2 
Sacrifice  was  the  summum  bonum  of  this  relationship.  If  much 
is  desired  much  must  be  given.  Hence  he  who  possessed  most 
— and  gave — had  the  advantage.  The  good  spirits  are  prized 
and  their  wants  are  supplied,  food  and  drink  are  furnished  them.3 
"The  Veddah  of  Ceylon  who  have  no  gods,  occasionally  sacri- 
fice food  to  the  spirits,"4  promising  if  success  is  granted  addi- 
tional offerings  will  be  made.  The  sacrifice  was  a  social  meal, 
often  so  elaborate  that  it  partook  of  the  dignity  of  a  banquet. 
It  was  not  an  occasion  merely  for  the  meeting  and  feasting  of 
friends,  members  of  a  class,  but  it  was  an  occasion  when  the 
deity  met  and  ate  and  drank  with  his  worshippers. 

Food  so  essential  to  man  was  likewise  so  considered  for  gods. 
"The  ultimate  element  of  all  wealth  is  food.  The  wealth  pro- 
duced by  the  common  enterprise  must  be  fairly  divided."5  Payne 
holds  that  this  covenant  of  the  gods  gave  to  human  society  co- 
herence and  stability.  These  spirits  or  forces  co-operating  with 
man  increased  the  energy  of  man  and  made  his  industry  pro- 
ductive.6 The  best  of  flocks,  herds,  field  and  of  industry  was 
given  to  the  gods.  These  offerings  were  often  a  heavy  drain, 
"upon  the  greatest  bank  of  civilization,  the  labour  of  man."7 
Not  to  offer  the  sacrifice  was  to  violate  the  covenant  and  thus 
to  secure  the  displeasure  of  the  god.  It  was  only  by  liberal 
sacrifices  that  the  divine  favor  could  be  again  secured  when 
once  lost. 

Agriculture  and  religious  ceremonies  develop  together.  For 
as  settled  man  comes  to  depend  more  and  more  on  the  produce 
of  the  soil  for  his  subsistence  and  believing  as  he  does  that 

!Payne.     History  of  the  New  World,  Called  America,  434.  'Ibid,  481-482. 

"Ibid,  435.  4Ibid,  600-601.  5Ibid,  484.  "Ibid,  485.         'Ibid,  485. 


38  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

spirits  and  gods  control  nature,  he  gives  much  attention  to  the 
gods.  In  a  later  stage  the  disposition  is  to  ignore  the  inferior 
deities  and  to  worship  and  offer  sacrifices  only  to  the  Creator, 
Sun,  Thunder,  Earth  and  Moon.1 

THE  COMMERCIAL  USE  OP  SACRIFICE. 

The  larger  number  of  sacrifices  were  offered  to  atone  for 
some,  "breach  of  rule  or  of  duty."  In  Homeric  days  "Artemis 
must  be  appeased  by  Iphigeria  and  the  sacrifice  has  to  be  ren- 
dered for  the  violation  of  the  priest.  Aegisthus  propitiates 
Heaven  with  gifts  of  garments  and  gold,  and  it  is  likely  that 
sacrifice  was  often  done  on  similar  occasions.  The  crew  of 
Odysseus,  about  to  steal  the  oxen  of  the  Sun,  vow  to  build  a 
temple  to  the  Sun  and  fill  it  with  fine  offerings.  So  Croesus, 
who  had  offended  the  oracles  of  Greece  by  doubting  their  power 
which  he  put  to  the  test  by  asking  them  a  ridiculous  riddle, 
tried  to  appease  the  two  which  were  found  true,  by  offering 
magnificent  gifts.  Xersex  too  after  flogging  the  Hellespont, 
propitiated  the  powers  of  the  sea  by  sacrifices  done  on  the 
bridge  and  by  casting  into  the  waters  the  golden  bowl  which 
he  had  used  in  Libation,  with  a  golden  crater,  and  a  Persian 
sword.  When  the  Lacedaemonians  had  so  treacherously  mur- 
dered the  Plataean  prisoners,  and  razed  their  City  to  the  ground, 
they  built  a  new  temple  for  Hera  and  used  the  bronze  and  iron 
they  found  within  the  place  to  make  fittings  for  it."2 

Ethical  principles  did  not  enter  into  the  transaction  nor  the 
principles  of  justice,  "men's  affairs  were  decided  not  according 
to  any  idea  of  abstract  justice,  but  by  a  balance  of  power  among 
the  gods.  To  render  the  struggle  for  existence  less  hard,  all 
men  had  need  of  the  gods."3  Whatever  may  have  been  the 
character  and  object  of  the  vows,  "it  is  clear  that  they  are  des- 
tined to  dispose  the  saint  favorably  to  the  suppliant,  so  that 
he  may  receive  the  protection  that  he  desires."4 

The  sacrifice  served  as  a  retaining  fee,  gifts  were  offered  in 
advance  of  any  special  request  so  that  whenever  a  need  on  the 
part  of  man  arose  the  god  would  be  on  his  side.  Sometimes  the 

iPayne.  History  of  the  New  World  Called  America,  601. 

2Rouse.  Greek  Votive  Offering,  310. 

3Keller.  Homeric  Society,    124. 

4Curtiss.  Primitive  Semitic  Religion  To-Day,  169. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  39 

sacrifice  partook  of  the  nature  of  a  bribe.  Wealth  served  as  an 
introducer  to  the  select  circle,  the  procurer  of  divine  favors.  No 
matter  what  the  man's  past  had  been,  no  matter  if  he  felt  no 
sorrow  for  his  sins,  if  he  only  made  an  acceptable  offering  he 
secured  his  request. 

If  a  law  is  violated,  punishment  will  follow,  if  a  violator  es- 
cape present  punishment,  he  will  suffer  hereafter.  "You  are  to 
punish  yourself  here,  lest  a  worse  thing  happen  to  you  else- 
where."1 

But  to  secure  a  favorable  consideration  there  is  always  re- 
quired a  sacrifice  of  value.  "A  man  is  justified  according  to 
the  amount  of  his  contribution  to  the  gods."2  A  hecatomb  of 
a  hundred  bulls  was  the  kind  of  sacrifice  that  pleased  the  deity. 

Among  some  primitive  peoples  it  was  the  custom  to  offer 
one's  own  blood  to  the  gods  as  a  means  of  commending  him- 
self to  his  deity.  In  ancient  India  human  sacrifice  was  not  only 
practiced  but  commended  to  those  who  would  be  heroes. 

In  later  development  a  change  took  place  and  substitution 
was  made.  Emancipation  in  many  of  the  Greek  states  was  a 
civil  act,  but  in  some  it  took  the  form  of  dedication  of  the  slave 
to  the  patrons  deity  of  the  city,  by  which  act  he  was  made  free 
of  human  control.  Money  payments  were  substituted  and  this 
gave  advantage  to  the  possessor  of  wealth.3 

By  the  use  of  wealth  it  was  possible  for  an  individual  to  ar- 
range for  an  another  to  attend  to  his  religious  duties  not  only 
for  the  present  but  for  the  future.  Money  gifts  or  legacies  were 
given  to  a  shrine  to  pay  the  cost  of  sacrifices.  "King  Attalus 
sent  money  to  Delphi,  for  education  and  the  keeping  up  of  sac- 
rifices, and  this  was  sanctified  to  the  god  that  the  gift  might  be 
in  force  for  ever.  Diomedon  of  Cos  left  property  by  will  for 
founding  a  shrine,  as  Epicteta  did  in  Thera,  and  the  same  thing 
is  known  in  North  Greece."4 

Among  the  early  Egyptains  religious  leaders  placed  such  em- 
phasis upon  the  saving  power  of  wealth  that  "there  was  no 
Egyptain  who  did  not  cherish  the  ambition  of  leaving  some 
such  legacy  to  the  patron  god  of  his  city,  for  a  monument  to 

Uevons.     An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Religion,  161. 
2Keller.     Homeric  Society,  138. 
3Rouse.     Greek  Votive  Offering,  335. 
«Ibid,  340. 


40  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

himself,  and  as  an  endowment  for  the  priest  to  institute  prayers 
and  perpetual  sacrifice  on  his  behalf."1 

Only  gods  who  did  something  for  men  survived  and  were 
cherished  and  worshipped  by  men.  " These  are  the  t'raphim  of 
the  Hebrews,  the  penates  of  the  Latins,  the  Conopa  of  the  Peru- 
vians; words  in  each  case  meaning  precisely  the  'nourishers'  or 
'food-givers'  of  the  household."2 

Curtiss  holds  that,  "the  original  idea  of  sacrifice  seems  to 
be  one  derived  from  experience  in  the  East,  if  not  in  the  West 
that,  'every  man  has  his  price.'  Hence  the  gods  have  their 
price.  If  a  god  has  brought  misfortune  upon  man,  he  can  be 
bought  off."3  God  makes  right  by  edict,  god  can  be  bought— 
that  is,  he  is  bribable."4 

The  code  of  Manu  taught  that  not  to  offer  sacrifices  was  to 
be  in  the  possession  of  demons.  "If  those  who  are  accustomed 
to  perform  sacrifices  possess  any  property,  the  wise  regard  it  as 
the  possession  of  the  gods;  but  if  those  who  do  not  offer  sacrifice 
possess  any  wealth,  it  is  said  to  be  the  possession  of  demons."5 
"Regularly,  then  penance  should  be  practiced  for  purification, 
since  those  whose  sins  have  not  (thus)  been  done  away  with 
are  born  with  (these)  disgraceful  marks  attached."6 

Maspero  in  his  study  of  the  Egyptians  finds  that  Egypt  was 
full  of  religions,  that  the  gods  were  numerous,  that  every  period 
of  a  person's  life  was  attended  by  some  god.  "The  prince  was 
the  great  high-priest.  The  whole  religion  of  the  norne  rested 
upon  him,  and  originally  he  himself  performed  its  ceremonies. 
Of  these  the  chief  was  sacrifice — that  is  to  say,  a  banquet  which 
it  was  his  duty  to  prepare  and  lay  before  the  god  with  his  own 
hands."7 

A  sacrifice  involved  a  feast  and  a  feast  could  not  be  provided 
without  a  sacrifice.  Though  it  was  not  possible  to  hold  the  ban- 
quet with  the  god  directly  because  he  was  far  away  yet  it  might 
be  held  with  his  saints  who  were  always  near.  When  men  eat 
with  men  or  men  eat  with  the  gods  it  signifies  that  they  are  on 
friendly  terms.  Eating  and  drinking  together  was  a  sign  of 

Waspero,  Dawn  of  Civilization,  126. 

2Payne.     History  of  the  New  World,  440. 

sCurtiss.     Primitive  Semitic  Religions  To- Day,   115. 

<Ibid,  66. 

»Burnell  and  Hopkins.     The  Ordinances  of  Manu,  327,  Article  20. 

8Manu,  331,  Article  54.  7Maspero.     The  Dawn  of  Civilization,  122  ff. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  41 

friendship  and  imposed  mutual  obligations.     At  the  sacrifice  the 
request,  whatever  might  be  its  nature,  was  made. 

SOME  TEACHINGS  OF  THE  EAST. 

Representing  a  distinct  and  important  type  of  civilization 
the  teaching  and  practice  of  the  Vedic  cult  as  taught  in  the  in- 
stitutes of  Manu  is  of  interest.  A  few  of  these  teachings  follow: 
36.  Having  duly  studied  the  Vedas,  and  begotten  sons  accord- 
ing to  law,  and  sacrificed  according  to  his  ability  with  sacrifice, 
he  should  fix  (his)  mind  on  deliverance. 

By  making  a  sacrifice  of  all  his  property  a  man  secured  spe- 
cial favors.  38.  Having  done  the  Prajapatya  sacrifice  with  a 
fee  of  all  (his)  property,  having  established  the — sacred — fires 
in  himself,  a  Brahman  should  go  forth  from  his  house."1 

97.  The  Vedas,  liberality  also  and  sacrifices,  observances  also 
and  austerities,  never  make  for  the  perfection  of  one  who  is  of 
depraved  nature,2  but  (42).  A  twice-born  man  who  knows  the 
real  meaning  of  the  Veda  (if)  he  slay  cattle  for  those  purposes 
(sacrifice),  causes  himself  and  the  cattle  to  reach  the  best  happi- 
ness.3 

154.  For  not  by  years,  nor  by  grey  hair,  not  by  wealth  or 
kindred — is  superiority;  the  seers-  made  the  rule — who  knows 
the  Veda  completely,  he  is  great  among  us.4 

It  is  seen  that  the  offering  of  all  property  secured  the  special 
favor  of  the  gods,  but  that  knowledge  was  more  important  than 
wealth.  The  following  words  of  the  "Holy  One,"  will  also  serve 
the  purpose  at  hand. 

25.  Among  the  various  things  offered  in  sacrifice  was  the, 
"offer  (of)  the  sacrifices  of  wealth  or  penance."5 

30.  All  these  are  skilled  in  sacrifice,  and  by  sacrifice  their 
sins  are  destroyed.  *  *  *  The  sacrifice  of  knowledge  is  bet- 
ter than  the  sacrifice  of  wealth,  O  slayer  of  foes!  Every  work, 
in  its  completeness,  is  contained  in  knowledge. 

35.  For  no  purifier  is  found  on  earth  equal  to  knowledge.6 
Hear  now,  O  son  of  Pritha!  how,  if  thy  heart  be  fixed  in  me, 
if  thou  continuest  in  devotion  and  findest  refuge  in  me,  thou 
shalt,  without  doubt  know  me  fully. 

iBurnell.     Institutes  of  Manu,  139.  2Ibid,  27  3Ibid,   115.          "Ibid,  34. 

5Davies.     Bhagavad  Gita,  62. 
'Ibid,  63. 


42  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

10.  A  sacrifice  which  is  offered  without  desire  for  gain  and 
according  to  rule,  in  saying,  'Sacrifice  must  be  done  with  a  re- 
solved mind,  is  good."     10.  But  the  ''sacrifice"  which  is  offered 
for  the  obtaining  of  reward  and  for  ostentation,  Know,  O  best 
of  Bharatas!  that  this  is  of  the  nature  of  "passion." 

11.  The  sacrifice  which  is  offered  against  the  rules,  without 
the  giving  of  food,  without  holy  hymns  and  Brahman  fees,  and 
devoid  of  faith,  is  declared  to  be  dark. 

Here  also  knowledge  surpassed  wealth,  and  an  unselfish  spirit 
was  necessary  in  order  to  secure  the  greatest  good.  Sacrifices, 
penance  or  alms  which  were  not  offered  in  a  proper  spirit,  were 
called  "asat,"  which  means  unreal  and  bad.1 

176.  Devote  thy  heart  to  Me,  worship  Me,  sacrifice  to  Me, 
bow  down  before  Me;  so  shall  thou  come  to  Me.  I  promise 
thee  truly;  thou  art  dear  to  Me.  Forsaking  all  religious  duties, 
come  to  Me  as  the  only  refuge.  I  will  release  thee  from  all  thy 
sins;  grieve  not.2 


CHAPTER  III. 


OCCASIONS  OF  SACRIFICE. 

It  is  difficult  to  name  an  occasion  when  sacrifice  was  not 
offered.  The  more  common  and  general  times  and  events  were: 
1.  For  the  dead.  2.  Before,  at  the  beginning  and  during  war. 
3.  For  victory.  4.  In  games,  sports  and  pastimes.  5.  In  case 
of  disaster,  disease  and  danger.  6.  Crisis  in  domestic  life.  7. 
To  secure  success  over  a  rival.  8.  Whenever  a  god  was  sup- 
posed to  be  angry.  9.  Time  of  vintage  and  harvest. 

The  Homeric  Greek  believed  in  the  immortality  of  the  de- 
parted. "The  dead  were  fitted  out  with  an  extensive  equip- 
ment, such  as  they  used  in  life  and  sometimes  with  companions 
for  the  journey.  They  were  supposed  to  cherish  the  same  hu- 
man feelings  as  living  men;  desire  for  property,  love  and  feel- 
ings and  pride,  jealousy,  pain,  etc.  The  dead  thus  provided 
was  not  only  able  to  supply  his  own  needs  and  desires  but  he 
was  to  bear  an  offering  to  the  gods."3  Curtiss  found  this  to  be 

Navies.     Bhagavad  Gita,  163.  ^Ibid,   163. 

3  Keller.     Homeric  Society,  104. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  43 

a  practice  among  the  Semites  of  the  present.  Sacrifices  are 
made  in  behalf  of  the  dead,  called  the  "fedou,"  such  a  sacrifice, 
"served  him  in  the  next  life  as  he  approaches  God."1  The 
burying  of  the  favorite  horse,  weapons,  clothes  and  food  was 
due  to  the  belief  that  the  future  life  is  but  the  continuum 
of  the  present  life.  And  as  here  so.  there  it  will  be  necessary 
to  stand  well  with  the  gods.2 

A  good  portion  of  the  time  of  early  man  was  spent  in  war. 
Such  men  often  turned  to  the  gods  for  help  and  protection.  The 
importance  of  the  issue  and  the  wealth  or  number  of  the  com- 
batants determined  the  kind  and  value  of  the  sacrifice.  "The 
Greek  army  went  into  battle  after  solemn  libations  and  sacri- 
fices, singing  paeans  of  victory  to  invoke  the  protection  of  the 
gods;  and  victory  was  celebrated  with  thanksgivings."3 

The  Greeks  were  given  much  to  sports,  games  and  contests. 
They  believed  that  deities  ruled  over  these  and  so  sacrifices 
were  offered  to  the  gods,  even  the  prizes  won  were  brought  to 
the  temples.4  At  Olympia  if  a  contestant  violated  the  rules 
of  a  game,  a  fine  was  imposed  and  this  was  used  to  erect  a 
bronze  statue  to  Zeus.5 

Whenever  a  plague  or  epidemic  broke  out  sacrifices  were 
always  offered.  Even  to  the  time  when  misfortune  comes  the 
Bedouin  or  unlearned  Syrian  knows  that  he  has  sinned  and  he 
seeks  with  a  gift  to  get  on  good  terms  with  the  god  that  he  has 
offended.  Among  these  peoples  whenever  things  do  not  go  right 
they  make  an  offering.6 

Since  supernatural  forces  hold  sway  over  nature  it  was  a 
common  practice  to  make  offerings  at  harvest  times.  "The 
beneficence  of  the  earth  deities  must  be  recognized,  or  it  might 
be  withheld;  hence  vintage  and  harvest  times  were  natural  sea- 
sons for  sacrifice  and  worship.  The  offering  of  firstlings  or  first 
fruits,  then,  appears  to  be  partly  an  act  of  propitiation,  by 
which  precious  things  hitherto  forbidden  might  be  made  avail- 
able; partly  an  act  of  gratitude  and  hope."7 

That  the  gods  might  be  propitious  and  send  children  to  the 
home  sacrifice  was  made.  That  the  offerings  were  general  and 


Primitive  Semitic  Religions  To-  Day,  178. 
sJevons.     An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Religion,  301. 
'Rouse.     Greek  Votive  Offering,  105.  "Ibid,   149.  &Ibid,  311. 

"Curtiss.     Primitive  Semitic  Religions  To-Day,  126. 
fRouse.     Greek  Votive  Offering,  41. 


44  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

sometimes  liberal  is  attested  by  the  fact  that  buildings,  shrines 
of  a  pretentious  character  were  built.  Shrines  even  to  this  day 
are  found  in  many  places.  It  is  thought  that  the  Treasuries  and 
Colonnades  were  erected  as  statues  to  the  deities  by  the  gifts 
received. 

The  Votive  offering  differed  from  other  sacrifices.  Its  char- 
acter was  freewill.  It  was  never  compulsory,  never  a  tax,  never 
a  payment  for  benefits  received.  The  offering  was  accidental 
rather  than  determined.  The  Greeks  believed  that  the  thought 
sanctified  the  deed.  This  kind  of  offering,  "may  be  called  ideal, 
as  meaning  more  than  appears  on  the  surface;  and  memorial,  as 
intending  to  keep  the  god's  beneficience  before  the  mind  of  the 
man,  and  no  less  the  man's  piety  or  gratitude  before  the  mind 
of  the  god."1 


CHAPTER  IV. 

PRIESTHOOD. 
ORIGIN. 

When  religion  is  simple  and  the  rites  and  ceremonials  are 
few  and  the  worshiper  and  the  god  hold  direct  communion,  no 
professional  priest  is  needed  to  perform  the  rites  and  ceremonials 
and  no  go-between  is  necessary  between  men  and  the  gods.  But 
when  religious  ceremonials  increase  in  numbers  and  complexity 
and  success  depends  upon  the  exact  performance  of  the  rites,  the 
occasion  arises  for  a  class  of  people  who  can  rightfully  perform 
these  duties.  "There  must  be  one  who  has  been  initiated  into 
the  possession  of  mystic  power,  who  knows  just  what  to  say— 
what  formula  of  many  complicated  formulas  to  use  under  given 
conditions."2  The  correct  performance  of  sacrifice  had  power 
not  merely  to  influence  but  to  compel  the  gods  to  do  the  will 
of  the  officiating  priest.  "By  means  of  it  the  Brahmans  may 
in  fact,  be  said  to  hold  the  gods  in  their  hands."3 

The  Homeric  Greeks  had  no  professional  priests.  However 
there  was  the  "priest-man"  who  had  by  his  many  sacrificial  ser- 


Greek  Votive  Offering,  356-377. 
2Keller.     Homeric  Society,  145. 
3MacDonell.     A  Histroy  of  Sanskript  Literature,  183. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  45 

vices  made  himself  solid  with  a  god  and  for  sacrificial  purpose 
had  erected  an  altar  on  his  own  account.  Such  priests  had  a 
settled  abode  and  served  a  particular  deity.  The  priests  of  the 
large  temples  were  of  noble  birth.  The  office  was  not  heredit- 
ary. The  priests  were  immune  from  military  service  and  though 
rich  and  honored  these  distinctions  were  individual  and  not  here- 
ditary.1 

Among  people  when  the  patriarchial  form  of  organization 
exists  the  patriarch  performs  the  religious  rites.  When  a  gov- 
ernment is  formed  it  is  monarchical.2  The  King  is  likely  to 
be  hereditary.  The  ruler  performs  the  function  of  the  priest. 
But  this  duty  is  soon  delegated  to  another.  Among  the  Vedas, 
the  priest  is  appointed  by  the  king  and  is  called  a  "purohita," 
or  domestic  chaplain.  This  employment  of  the  Purohitas  for 
"the  performance  of  sacrificial  functions  was  the  beginning  of 
the  oldest  form  of  priesthood  in  India."3  The  priests  placed 
special  stress  upon  the  efficacy  of  their  invocations  and  inter- 
cessions and  they  did  not  forget  to  emphasize  the  advisability 
of  a  liberal  reward  for  their  services. 

From  the  Institutes  of  Manu  it  is  learned  that  to  offer  sac- 
rifices made  one  a  priest  and  that  two  classes  of  priests  were 
recognized.  "He  who,  chosen  by  any  one,  performs  the  agny- 
adheya — sacred  fires  *  *  *  and  other  sacrifices,  is  called 
here  the  sacrificial  priest."4  The  King  was  expected  to  appoint 
two  kinds  of  priests,  "and  he  should  appoint  a  domestic  priest, 
and  choose  a  sacrificial  priest;  these  should  perform  the  domestic 
and  sacrificial  rites  for  him."5 

Under  the  reign  of  David,  Jerusalem  became  the  religious 
as  well  as  the  political  center  of  the  Hebrews.  Tradition  and 
custom  were  ignored  and  David  offered  sacrifices  without  the 
service  of  a  priest.8  In  due  time  the  king  appointed  priests 
and  these  strongly  supported  the  court.  Later,  son  succeeded 
the  father  and  the  priesthood  became  hereditary. 

teller.     Homeric  Society,  147. 

2MacDonell.     A  History  of  Sanskript  Literature,  158. 

aibid,  159. 

'Burnell.     The  Ordinance  of  Manu,  33. 

-Ibid,  158. 

"I  Sam.,  9-13;  II  Sam.,  6-14;  I.  K.,  3-4  and  9-25. 


46  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

FUNCTIONS  OF  THE  PRIEST. 

When  a  religion  has  made  some  development  and  rites  and 
ceremonies  have  assumed  importance  then  the  priest  becomes 
an  important  personage.  Worship,  belief  and  conduct  consti- 
tute the  principal  element  of  early  religion.  The  function  of 
the  priest  was  to  conduct  the  worship,  to  formulate  and  enun- 
ciate the  creed  and  to  determine  and  supervise  the  conduct. 
Among  the  Israelites  the  work  of  the  priest  was  "to  carry  the 
ark,  to  minister  to  Jehovah,  to  bless  his  name."1 

The  priest  in  addition  to  what  might  be  strictly  called  reli- 
gious functions  performed  other  offices,  among  these  was  the 
writing  of  the  history  of  worship.  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  were 
such  historians.2  Another  service  was  that  of  the  legislator. 

Dr.  Harper  says  that  legislation  was  in  its  stricter  sense  the 
function  of  the  priests  rather  than  that  of  the  prophets  or  sages. 
More  than  those  ecclesiastical  duties  which  to-day  make  up  the 
life  of  the  priest  were  in  these  early  times  included  in  his  work. 
Religion,  politics  and  secular  life  were  all  one  and  the  priest 
dealt  with  it  all.  The  care  and  treatment  of  the  cattle,  of  the 
men  servants,  of  the  maid  servants,  the  building  of  a  house, 
the  oppression  of  the  poor,  the  defective  classes,  the  offenders 
of  the  law  were  all  under  his  supervision.3  It  was  the  social 
power  of  the  priest  that  made  him  important  in  the  history  of 
civilization. 

The  priest  was  one  who  had  secured  special  favor  from  the 
gods,  either  through  services  rendered  or  by  continual  sacri- 
fices offered.  He  was  often  of  noble  birth.  Since  prayers  and 
offerings  were  efficacious  in  securing  divine  favor  and  men  were 
not  always  willing  to  devote  the  necessary  time  and  labor  to 
perform  such  service,  those  who  had  wealth  would  pay  the 
priest  to  offer  prayers  and  sacrifices  for  them.  When  the  num- 
ber of  prayers  became  important  the  use  of  wealth  to  secure 
the  priest's  service  became  intensified  and  gave  the  advantage 
to  the  man  of  wealth.  That  large  sums  were  thus  used  is  seen 
from  the  fact  that  many  of  the  priests  became  exceedingly 

1  Harper.     Priestly  Element  in  the  Old  Testament,  1,  3. 

»Harper.  Priestly  Element  in  Old  Testament,  8.  Exod.,  23:18-19;  Deut.,  30:15-20; 
Lev.,  21;  Deut.,  22:1-12;  Exod.,  21:1-35;  22:1-27;  Lev.,  19:9-37;  Exod.,  23:1-9. 

'Harper.     Priestly  Element  in  Old  Testament,  7. 

NOTE — For  a  full  and  extended  treatise  on  the  office  and  function  of  the  priest  and 
of  the  meaning,  see  Harper — Priestly  Element  in  the  Old  Testament. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  47 

wealthy.  "He  was  a  'pray-er'  and  was  employed  to  pray  for 
the  people  and  for  this  he  was  paid.  All  priests  were  rich  to 
Homer,  and  one  of  them  possessed  the  finest  'dark'  wine  of 
which  he  knew."1 

Riggs  speaking  of  the  priest  of  the  Hebrews  under  Roman 
rules  says,  "The  emoluments  of  their  office  brought  them  wealth 
and  luxury,  and  gave  them  little  interest  in  the  spiritual  de- 
mands of  their  exalted  position.  *  *  *  Indeed  from  the 
time  that  the  office  of  the  high  priest  had  been  at  the  disposal 
of  the  civil  ruler,  the  glory  of  the  priesthood  had  been  shadowed. 
The  priest  took  little  or  no  interest  in  their  work,  they  became 
arrogant  and  worldly  minded.  Their  prayers  and  devotions 
lacked  the  spirit  of  devotion."2  Every  prayer  being  coupled 
with  some  particular  rite  and  aiming  solely  at  securing  material 
advantages. 


CHAPTER  V. 

HEBRAISM. 

The  Jewish  religion  in  its  origin  was  non-commercial.  This 
is  a  characteristic  of  all  religions  in  their  earliest  stages.  In 
normadic  conditions  there  is  no  property  class.  Such  wealth 
as  may  exist  is  common  and  used  for  the  benefit  of  all.  But 
when  a  property  class  arises,  religion  loses  its  purity  and  soon 
wealth  plays  an  important  role  in  the  religious  life  of  the  people. 

Through  association  with  the  Canaanites  the  Hebrews  in 
their  religious  life  became  corrupted.  In  place  of  the  simple 
sacrifice  offered  without  ostentation,  "the  religious  feasts  neces- 
sarily assumed  a  new  and  more  luxurious  character."3  There 
were  ebbs  and  flood  of  religious  fervor  and  life  but  every  inflow 
of  heathen  form  and  cultus  left  Israel  spiritually  poorer.  The 
simplicity  of  the  desert  life  yielded  to  the  effects  of  the  material 
civilization.  Though  Jehovah  was  still  worshipped  and  consi- 
dered as  a  protecting  God,  yet  there  was  a  growing  tendency 
to  conceive  of  him,  "very  much  as  their  neighbors,  the  Moa- 
bites,  or  Edomites  conceived  of  their  natural  gods."4 

iReller.     Homeric  Society,  148. 

2Riggs.     A  History  of  the  Jewish  People,  227. 

"Smith.     The  Prophets  of  Israel,  38.  <Ibid,  24. 


48  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

Sacrifices  in  large  numbers  and  of  great  richness  were  of- 
fered but  these  did  not  find  acceptance  with  God  or  procure 
his  favor.  "For  thus  saith  the  Lord  unto  the  house  of  Israel, 
Seek  ye  me,  and  ye  shall  live;  but  seek  not  Beth-el,  nor  enter 
into  Gilgal,  and  pass  not  to  Beersheba;  for  Gilgal  shall  surely  go 
into  captivity,  and  Beth-el  shall  come  to  naught."1 

While  sacrifices  were  offered  and  were  an  important  part  of 
the  worship  of  the  old  dispensation,  there  was  always  a  call  for 
a  repentent  spirit  and  a  contrite  heart.  God  is  no  respecter  of 
persons.  The  Hebrew  religion  was  non-commercial.  "God  will 
provide  himself  the  lamb  for  a  burnt  offering."2  "To  do  justice, 
and  love  mercy  and  walk  humbly  with  thy  God,"3  secured  divine 
approval.  "Ho,  every  one  that  thirsteth,  come  ye  to  the  waters, 
and  he  that  hath  no  money;  come  ye,  buy,  and  eat;  yea,  come, 
buy  wine  and  milk  without  money  and  without  price,"4  was 
the  cry  of  the  prophet.  This  teaching  and  system  of  salvation 
placed  all  on  the  same  plane  and  took  away  from  wealth  its 
saving  power. 

Though  the  priesthood  became  greatly  debased  and  religious 
worship  corrupted,  during  all  the  stages  of  Israel's  history  there 
were  some  who  uttered  strong  protest  against  such  corruption. 
Men  like  Samuel  and  David;  Elijah  and  Elisha;  Jonah,  Amos, 
Hosea,  Isaiah  and  Malachi;  Zephaniah  and  Jeremiah,  made 
great  efforts  to  accomplish  reforms  in  the  worship  of  Israel.5 
This  they  did  by,  "pointing  out  a  truer  conception  of  God,  the 
following  of  which  affected  both  the  conduct  and  worship  of  the 
nation."6 

Although  sacrifice  became  an  exclusively  religious  act,  "the 
prophets  strongly  denounced  sacrifice  in  which  the  true  spirit 
of  worship  was  lacking  or  which  in  itself,  without  a  proper  life, 
was  thought  to  gain  Jehovah's  favor."7  The  prophets  who 
spoke  the  strongest  against  the  commercialization  of  religion 
were  Amos,  Hosea  and  Isaiah. 

The  self-indulgent  luxury,  the  indifference  and  immorality 
of  the  age  is  denounced.  "Thus  saith  the  Lord:  For  three 
transgressions  of  Judah,  yea,  for  four,  I  will  not  turn  away  the 
punishment  thereof;  because  they  have  rejected  the  law  of  the 
Lord,  and  have  not  kept  his  statutes  and  their  lies  have  caused 


,  5:4.  'Ex.,  22:8,  13.  «Micah,  6-8.  <Isa.,  55:1. 

"Harper.     The  Priestly  Element  in  Old  Testament,  19.         6Ibid,   16.         'Ibid,  4. 


WAELTH    AND    RELIGION  49 

them  to  err,  after  the  which  their  fathers  did  walk;  but  I  will 
send  a  fire  upon  Judah,  and  it  shall  devour  the  palaces  of  Jeru- 
salem. Thus  saith  the  Lord:  For  three  transgressions  of  Is- 
rael, yea,  for  four,  I  will  not  turn  away  the  punishment  thereof; 
because  they  have  sold  the  righteous  for  silver,  and  the  needy 
for  a  pair  of  shoes;  that  pant  after  the  dust  of  the  earth  on  the 
head  of  the  poor,  and  turn  aside  the  way  of  the  meek;  and  a 
man  and  his  father  will  go  unto  the  same  maid,  to  profane  my 
holy  name;  and  they  lay  themselves  down  beside  every  altar 
upon  clothes  taken  in  pledge,  and  in  the  house  of  their  God 
they  drink  the  wine  of  such  as  have  been  fined.  Yet  destroyed 
I  the  Amorite  before  them,  whose  height  was  like  the  height  of 
the  cedars,  and  he  was  strong  as  the  oaks;  yet  I  destroyed  his 
fruit  from  above,  and  his  roots  from  beneath.  Also  I  brought 
you  up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  led  you  forty  years  in  the 
wilderness,  to  possess  the  land  of  the  Amorite.  And  I  raised 
up  of  your  sons  for  prophets,  and  of  your  young  men  for  Nazi- 
rites.  Is  it  not  even  thus,  O  ye  children  of  Israel?  saith  the 
Lord.  But  ye  gave  the  Nazirites  wine  to  drink;  and  commanded 
the  prophets,  saying,  Prophecy  not.  Behold,  I  will  press  you  in 
your  place,  as  a  cart  presseth  that  is  full  of  sheaves.  And  flight 
shall  perish  from  the  swift,  and  the  strong  shall  not  strengthen 
his  force,  neither  shall  the  mighty  deliver  himself:  neither  shall 
he  stand  that  handleth  the  bow;  and  he  that  is  swift  of  foot 
shall  not  deliver  himself:  neither  shall  he  that  rideth  the  horse 
deliver  himself:  and  he  that  is  courageous  among  the  mighty 
shall  flee  away  naked  in  that  day,  saith  the  Lord."1  2 

Ceremonial  worship  was  vain,  "Come  to  Beth-el,  and  trans- 
gress; to  Gilgal,  and  multiply  transgression;  and  bring  your  sac- 
rifices every  morning,  and  your  tithes  every  three  days;  and 
offer  a  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  of  that  which  is  leavened,  and 
proclaim  freewill  offerings  and  publish  them;  for  this  liketh  you, 
O  ye  children  of  Israel,  saith  the  Lord  God.  And  I  also  have 
given  you  cleanness  of  teeth  in  all  your  cities,  and  want  of  bread 
in  all  your  places:  yet  have  ye  not  returned  unto  me,  saith  the 
Lord."3 

The  priest  was  as  sinful  as  the  people,  "And  thou  shalt 


2:6-16. 

2See  also  Amos,  4:4-6;  Hosea,  2:2-17. 
»See  also  Hosea,  4:4-5. 


50  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

stumble  in  the  day,  and  the  prophet  also  shall  stumble  with 
thee  in  the  night."1  "They  shall  go  with  their  flocks  and  with 
their  herds  to  seek  the  Lord;  but  they  shall  not  find  him;  he 
hath  withdrawn  himself  from  them."2 

True  repentance  not  ceremony  was  necessary  to  secure  sal- 
vation. "For  thus  saith  the  Lord  unto  the  house  of  Israel, 
Seek  ye  me,  and  ye  shall  live;  but  seek  not  Beth-el,  nor  enter 
into  Gilgal,  and  pass  not  to  Beersheba:  for  Gilgal  shall  surely 
go  into  captivity,  and  Beth-el  come  to  nought.  Seek  the  Lord, 
and  ye  shall  live;  lest  he  break  out  like  fire  in  the  house  of  Jo- 
seph, and  it  devour  and  there  be  none  to  quench  it  in  Beth-el."3 
"For  I  desire  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice;  and  the  knowledge  of 
God  more  than  burnt  offerings'.'4  "To  what  purpose  is  the  mul- 
titude of  your  sacrifices  unto  me?  saith  the  Lord.  I  am  full  of 
the  burnt  offerings  of  rams,  and  the  fat  of  fed  beasts;  and  I 
delight  not  in  the  blood  of  bullocks,  or  of  lambs,  or  of  he-goats. 
When  ye  come  to  appear  befure  me,  who  had  required  this  at 
your  hand,  to  trample  my  courts?  Bring  no  more  vain  obla- 
tions; incense  is  an  abomination  unto  me;  new  moon  and  sab- 
bath, the  calling  of  assemblies,  —  I  cannot  away  with  iniquity 
and  the  solemn  meeting.  Your  new  moons  and  your  appointed 
feasts  my  soul  hateth:  they  are  a  trouble  unto  me;  I  am  weary 
to  bear  them.  And  when  ye  spread  forth  your  hands,  I  will 
hide  mine  eyes  from  you:  yea,  when  ye  make  many  prayers,  I 
will  not  hear:  your  hands  are  full  of  blood.  Wash  you,  make 
clean;  put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine  eyes; 
cease  to  do  evil  :  learn  to  do  well;  seek  judgment,  relieve  the  op- 
pressed, judge  the  fatherless,  plead  for  the  widow.  Come  now, 
and  let  us  reason  together,  saith  the  Lord:  though  your  sins  be 
as  scarlet,  they  shall  be  as  white  as  snow;  though  they  be  red 
like  crimson,  they  shall  be  as  wool.  If  ye  be  willing  and  obe- 
dient, ye  shall  eat  the  good  of  the  land:  but  if  ye  refuse  and 
rebel,  ye  shall  be  devoured  with  sword:  for  the  mouth  of  the 
Lord  hath  spoken  it."5 

The  wealth  of  sacrifice  with  poverty  of  penetance  Jehovah 
despised  and  rejected.  "I  hate,  I  despise  your  feasts,  and  I  will 
take  no  delight  in  your  solemn  assemblies.  Yea,  though  ye 
offer  me  your  burnt  offerings  and  meal  offerings,  I  will  not  ac- 


43:4-5.  2See  also  Hosea,  5:6.  'Amos,  5:4-6. 

'Hosea,  6:6.  ^Isiah,  1:11-20. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  51 

cept  them:  neither  will  I  regard  the  peace  offerings  of  your  fat 
beasts.  Take  thou  away  from  me  the  noise  of  thy  songs;  for 
I  will  not  hear  the  melody  of  the  viols.  But  let  judgment  roll 
down  as  waters,  and  righteousness  as  a  mighty  stream."1 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE  EARLY  CHRISTIAN  ERA. 

When  Christ  began  his  public  ministry  he  found  that  not 
only  had  much  of  cant,  hypocrisy  and  meaningless  forms  made 
their  way  into  the  religious  life  of  the  people,  but,  that  the  lavish 
use  of  wealth  to  secure  divine  favors  was  being  practiced.  That 
such  a  profane  use  of  wealth  could  not  win  the  sought  after 
favor  is  well  illustrated  in  the  account  of  the  widow  and  her 
mite.  "And  he  sat  down  over  against  the  treasury,  and  beheld 
how  the  multitude  cast  money  into  the  treasury:  and  many  that 
were  rich  cast  in  much.  And  there  came  a  poor  widow,  and  she 
cast  in  two  mites,  which  make  a  farthing.  And  he  called  unto 
him  his  disciples,  and  said  unto  them,  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
this  poor  widow  cast  in  more  than  all  they  which  are  casting 
into  the  treasury.  For  they  all  did  cast  in  of  their  superfluity; 
but  she  of  her  want  did  cast  in  all  that  she  had,  even  all  her 
living."2  It  was  the  spirit  in  which  the  offering  was  made  that 
won  the  Master's  approval.  This  circumstance  was  a  severe 
blow  at  the  attempt  to  commercialize  religion. 

Christ  taught  that  riches  though  accompanied  by  morality 
were  not  able  to  secure  eternal  life  and  heaven.  To  the  rich 
young  ruler  who  came  to  Jesus,  asking  what  shall  I  do  to  in- 
herit eternal  life,  Jesus  said,  "sell  all  that  thou  hast,  and  distri- 
bute unto  the  poor  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in  heaven." 
"It  is  easier  for  a  camel  to  enter  in  through  a  needle's  eye, 
than  for  a  rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom  of  God."3 

The  selection  of  men  from  the  humbler  occupations  by  Jesus 
for  his  apostles  and  the  sending  them  forth  with  the  injunction, 
to  take  neither  purse  or  script  is  another  instance  of  how  little 
the  Man  of  Galilee  depended  upon  wealth  to  promulgate  his 
teachings. 

1Amos,  5:21-24.  'Mark,  12:41-44.  »Luke,  18:18-25. 


52  THE   SOCIAL    POWER   OF    WEALTH 

During  its  early  history  the  Christian  church  was  excep- 
tionally free  from  the  domination  of  wealth.  The  first  cen- 
turies were  devoted  to  the  propogation  of  the  new  faith,  to  the 
moral  reformation  of  the  people;  the  next  were  occupied  in  the 
defense  of  the  gospel  and  in  the  struggle  between  heresy  and 
orthodoxy  and  then  all  this  energy  was  turned  to  the  securing 
of  wealth. 

Later  the  possession  of  large  wealth  removed  the  church 
from  a  position  of  penury  and  uncertainty  and  inadequate 
support  to  one  of  affluence.  But  she  lost  much  of  her  spirit- 
uality and  power,  "covetousness  especially  became  almost  a 
characteristic  vice."1  "The  people  compounded  for  the  most 
atrocious  crimes  by  gifts  to  shrines,  to  those  saints  whose  inter- 
cession was  supposed  to  be  unfailing."2 

The  one  cardinal  principle  which  distinguished  the  Christian 
religion  from  non-christian  religions  was  the  emphasis  which  the 
former  placed  upon  personal  purity  and  salvation  through  indi- 
vidual repentance  and  acceptance  of  Jesus  Christ  as  a  personal 
saviour. 

Pecuniary  compensation  for  crime  and  sin  formed  no  part  of 
the  Christian  faith.  However,  pagan  customs  and  practices 
crept  in  and  influenced  Christian  teachers  and  communicants. 
Commercialism  of  religion  reached  its  zenith  with  Tetzel 
selling  indulgences  and  placing  the  "Mercy  of  God''  on  the 

market  for  so  much  per  .  Luther  with  the  doctrine  of 

"Justification  by  Faith"  proved  the  Waterloo  of  salvation 
through  wealth  and  re-established  the  Christian  church  on  the 
plane  of  non-commercialism  upon  which  it  had  been  placed  by 
its  founder. 

26L 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  53 


CHAPTER  VII. 


THE  MIDDLE  AGES  AND  TO-DAY. 

SOURCES  OF  CHURCH  WEALTH. 

So  great  was  the  commercialization  of  the  church  of  the 
middle  ages  that  it  resorted  to  a  large  number  of  ways  and 
means  to  secure  wealth,  and  the  willingness  with  which  the  people 
of  wealth  contributed  to  the  church  through  these  various  means 
shows  their  belief  in  a  purchasable  religion.  The  following 
may  be  mentioned  as  the  sources  of  wealth  of  the  church.1 

1.  From  gifts — including  the  holding  of  estates  to  avoid  the 
payment  of  taxes  by  the  owner.  2.  Credulity  and  supersti- 
tion of  the  people.  3.  Efficacy  of  gifts  to  expiate  sins.  4.  Doc- 
trine of  purgatory.  5.  Veneration  for  relics.  6.  Worship  of 
images.  7.  Idolatry  of  saints  and  martyrs.  8.  Mass  for  the 
dead.  9.  Personal  gifts  of  Emperors,  Kings  and  Princes.  10. 
Cultivation  of  estates  and  grants.  11.  Purchase  of  properties 
during  crusades.  12.  Surrender  of  property  on  entering  a  mon- 
astery. 13.  Surrender  of  property  on  going  to  war.  14.  Gifts 
for  charity.  15.  Seizure  of  estates  or  portions  of  them.  16. 
Fear  of  denial  of  the  last  sacrament.  17.  Canonical  penance. 
18.  Dispensations  and  indulgences. 

The  invasion  of  the  barbarians  from  the  north  formed  an- 
other source  of  wealth.  While  these  peoples  in  great  numbers 
professed  conversion  to  the  Christian  faith,  they  retained  many 
of  their  former  beliefs  and  practices.  Among  these  were  the 
superstitious  reverence  for  the  priesthood,  a  credulity  that 
seemed  to  invite  imposture  and  a  confidence  in  the  efficacy  of 
gifts  to  expiate  offenses. 

The  Roman  law  did  not  permit  the  tenure  of  lands  in  mort- 
main. Certain  immovable  estates  the  revenues  of  which  were 
applicable  to  their  own  maintenance  and  that  of  the  poor,  and 
estates  and  property  given  to  avoid  taxation,  i.  e.  on  the  immu- 
nity plan. 

The  veneration  for  relics  and  the  worship  of  images  or  saints 
and  martyrs  early  arose  and  from  the  first  proved  a  source  of 

iSee  Hallam.     Europe  During  the  Middle  Ages,  Chapter  7;  261  ff. 


54  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

profit.  The  doctrine  of  purgatory,  the  vivid  descriptions  of 
hell  and  future  punishment  together  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
escape  from  all  this  through  a  payment  was  a  great  source  of 
wealth. 

Through  masses  for  the  dead  the  rich  were  enabled  to  secure 
relief  for  their  departed  friends  and  this  yielded  an  enormous 
income.  Much  wealth  came  in  the  form  of  donations,  espe- 
cially after  the  beginning  of  the  16th  century.  Emperors,  kings, 
and  princes  made  large  personal  coutributions.  Many  churches 
possessed  7,000  or  8,000  manse,  one  with  but  2,000  passed  for 
only  indifferently  rich.1 

The  cultivation  of  the  estates  was  a  source  of  wealth  un- 
questionable. During  a  crusade  the  land  of  those  going,  could 
be  bought  at  a  fraction  of  its  value,  and  this  went  to  swell  the 
coffers  of  the  church.  One  entering  a  monastery  voluntarily 
surrendered  his  estates  to  the  church.  Small  wonder  that  the 
church  favored  the  monastery.  Gifts  for  charity  formed  an  im- 
portant part  of  the  income  of  the  church.  The  property  of 
those  going  on  military  expeditions  was  often  given  to  the 
church. 

The  sinful  rich  were  especially  taught  that  a  large  donation 
was  the  one  sure  passport  to  heaven.  To  die  and  not  leave  a 
portion  to  the  church  was  considered  impious  and  often  led  to 
the  refusal  of  the  last  sacrament.  "A  rich  man  was  scarcely 
deemed  a  Christian  if  he  did  not  leave  a  portion  of  his  property 
to  the  church  and  the  charters  of  innumerable  monasteries  in 
every  part  of  Europe  attest  the  vast  tracts  of  land  that  were 
ceded  by  will  to  the  Monks  for  the  benefit  of  the  soul  of  the 
testator."2 

Canonical  penances,  extravagantly  severe,  imposed  upon  re- 
pentant offenders  were  commuted  for  money  or  property.  As 
early  as  the  Ninth  century,  the  Arch-bishop  of  Canterbury  pub- 
lished a  tariff  list  of  penances.3  A  payment  of  one  hundred 
shillings  was  accepted  in  lieu  of  a  year's  penance  of  singing 
psalms,  fasts  and  strokes  on  the  hand.  The  merits  of  heaven 
were  sold  at  both  private  and  public  sales.  People  were  re- 
leased from  all  vows  and  from  all  penance  by  a  money  pay- 


European  Morals,  2:246. 
"Ibid,  229. 
'Jusserand.     English  Wayfaring  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages,  309  ff. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  55 

ment.1  Some  of  the  Pardoners,  as  they  were  called,  were  author- 
ized to  ply  their  trade  and  they  sent  a  part  of  their  earnings  to 
the  Roman  Court.  Very  much  the  same  condition  existed  in 
France,  Germany,  Italy  and  Spain. 

So  extensive  became  this  practice  that  certain  Germans  said, 
"the  last  popes  have  put  a  price  upon  sins  like  shop  keepers 
'wares'  and  have  sold  remission  of  sins  by  means  of  indulgences 
for  jingling  coins."2  TetzeFs  list  contained  such  rates  as  these, 
" sodomy  was  rated  at  twelve  ducats,  sacrilege  at  nine,  murder 
at  seven,  witchcraft  at  six,  murder  of  parents  or  brothers  at 
four."3 

The  chamberlain  of  Innocent  VIII  declared  that,  "God  wil- 
leth  not  the  death  of  a  sinner,  but  that  he  should  pay  and 
live."  It  was  even  declared,  "that  the  dealer  in  pardons  saved 
more  people  than  Peter."4  In  England  in  the  Fourteenth  cen- 
tury, wandering  preachers  and  friars  went  about  selling  indul- 
gences and  letters  of  fraternity — drafts  on  heaven. 

INFLUENCE  OF  WEALTH  ON  THE  CHURCH. 

In  no  country  is  the  demoralizing  influence  of  wealth  on  the 
church  more  clearly  seen  than  in  France.  The  fashionable 
world  for  ten  years  past,  says  Marcie  in  1783,  "has  not  at- 
tended mass.  People  go  only  on  Sundays  so  as  not  to  scan- 
dalize their  lackeys  while  the  lackeys  well  knew  that  it  is  on 
their  account."6 

So  irreligious  became  the  people  and  so  little  faith  had  they 
in  the  mass  that  it  was  said  that  during  the  illness  of  the  King 
of  France,  1757,  private  individuals  paid  for  6,000  masses,  while 
in  1774  after  an  attempt  had  been  made  on  the  life  of  the  King 
only  600  masses  were  demanded,  and  during  his  fatal  illness 
only  three  masses  were  asked  for.6 

The  clergy  of  the  higher  orders  through  their  wealth  ob- 
tained many  privileges,  immunities  and  concessions.  (1)  Some- 

^ausser.     The  Period  of  the  Reformation,  1517-1648,  16.  2Ibid,  16. 

3Ibid,   17.  4Ibid,  17. 

NOTE — The  belief  that  sacrifice  wins  the  favor  of  God  and  that  prayers  and  masses 
deliver  the  soul  from  purgatory  is  still  taught  in  South  America.  In  Uraguay  indulgences 
are  sold.  For  twenty-five  cents  paid  hi  advance  a  person  can  sin  for  a  week  with  immu- 
nity. Pardons  for  sins  come  at  a  very  low  price. 

6Taine.     Ancient  Regime,  291.  6Ibid,  291. 


56  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

times  they  paid  no  taxes.  (2)  Were  able  to  buy  off  the  King. 
(3)  To  have  the  tax  which  they  did  pay,  considered  as  a  free 
gift,  given  in  exchange  for  concessions. 

On  one  occasion  the  clergy  borrowed  from  the^Royal  treas- 
ury not  only  enough  to  pay  the  tax  already  reduced  but  an 
amount  in  excess  of  the  tax.1 

These  same  clergy  gave  but  little  attention  to  religious  mat- 
ters. The  bishops  and  some  of  the  priests  were  seignior- 
suzerains,  they  had  vassals,  doled  out  fiefs  and  received  homage 
and  incomes  from  the  fief  holders.  The  Bishop  for  Gevaudan, 
when  entreated  to  appear  in  the  assembly  of  the  three  orders 
of  the  provience,  replied  that  his  place,  his  possessions  and  his 
rank  exalting  him  above  every  individual  in  his  diocese,  he  can 
not  sit  under  the  presidency  of  any  person;  that  being  seignior 
— suzerain  of  all  estates  and  particularly  of  the  baronies,  he  can 
not  give  way  to  his  vassals.  In  brief  he  is  king,  or  but  little 
short  of  it,  in  his  own  province.2 

During  this  period  the  Bishop  exercised  much  power  in  poli- 
tical affairs,  he  appointed  judges,  forest  wardens,  imposed  fines 
and  even  the  death  penalty.3  The  hand  of  greed  was  large,  and 
the  arm  that  extended  it  was  long;  the  mind  that  guided  it 
was  covetous  and  every  thing  was  seized  that  was  seizable. 

The  immorality  of  the  wealthy  clergy  became  great.  They 
lost  all  sense  of  propriety  and  decency,  they  were  much  given 
to  drinking,  dancing  and  gaming.  Immoral  plays  were  attended. 
Even  mistresses  were  kept  in  their  houses,  though  they  pro- 
fessed celibacy.  "Rich  widows  were  surrounded  by  swarms  of 
clerical  sycophants,  who  addressed  them  in  tender  diminutives, 
studied  and  consulted  their  every  foible,  and  under  the  guise  of 
piety,  lay  in  wait  for  their  gifts  or  bequests."4 

The  clergy  sought  to  imitate  the  King  and  had  their  magni- 
ficent seats,  houses,  retinue,  equipage,  and  even  debts.  The 
office  of  Bishop  was  often  hereditary.  At  Savern  there  were 
in  the  Bishop's  house  700  beds,  180  horse,  14  butlers  and  25 
valets.5 

Unbelief  and  scepticism  entered  largely  into  the  life  of  the 
clergy.  "In  the  month  of  August,  1767,  the  Abbe  Bassinet, 

iTaine,  Ancient  Regime,  18  ff.  2Ibid,     20.  3Ibid,  20. 

<Leckey.     European  Morals,  2:60. 
6Taine.     Ancient  Regime,  375. 


WEALTH    AND    RELIGION  57 

grand  Vicar  of  Cahors,  in  pronouncing  the  panegyric  of  St.  Louis 
in  the  Louvre  chapel,  suppressed  the  Sign  of  the  Cross,  making 
no  quotation  from  scripture  and  never  uttering  a  word  about 
Christ  and  the  Saints."1 

TO-DAY. 

Wealth  still  plays  an  important  part  in  religious  life.  It  is 
not  used  to  secure  spiritual  results  but  social  and  material  pres- 
tige. It  is  used  to  secure  favor  of  men,  not  of  God.  The  sacri- 
fice must  now  be  a  contrite  spirit  and  a  broken  heart. 

Wealth  is  a  factor  in  the  religious  life  of  to-day.  There  has 
simply  been  a  change  in  the  placing  of  the  accent.  The  church 
with  its  massive  brick  or  stone  walls,  lofty  spire,  elaborate  and 
costly  windows,  with  its  rich  furnishings,  high  salaried  choir, 
pipe  organ  and  degreed  minister,  attracts  much  more  attention 
than  a  less  pretentious  church,  even  though  it  be  of  the  same 
denomination  and  located  in  the  same  city.  The  question  or 
criteria  which  decides  the  church  attendance  and  membership 
of  not  a  few,  is  which  church  will  give  the  greatest  social  pres- 
tige. Spiritual  development,  opportunity  to  do  good,  to  aid 
the  needy,  to  worship  freely  are  often  sacrificed.  In  the  erec- 
tion of  church  buildings  considerable  strife  is  made  to  outdo  a 
a  rival  church.  The  worshipper  of  such  a  church  may  be  no 
more  religious  or  pious  or  tenacious  to  his  belief  than  the  poorest 
communicant. 

To  repent  in  sack  cloth  and  ashes  was  required  of  the  suppli- 
ant of  an  earlier  day,  now  the  suppliant  clan  in  purple  casts  a 
golden  piece  upon  the  silver  plate  and  secures  if  not  salvation 
at  least  social  prestige. 

iTaine.     Ancient  Regime,  292. 


58  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 


PART  III. 


WEALTH  AND  LAW. 

The  Law  is  also  the  monopoly  of  wealth ,  and  in  the  Temple 
of  Themis  there  is  no  place  reserved  for  the  labourer. — Loria. 

CHAPTER  I. 

PRIMITIVE  LAW. 

All  primitive  societies  are  crude.  No  law  exists.  Every 
man  is  a  law  unto  himself.  Brute  strength  is  the  ruling  force. 
The  only  method  to  avenge  a  wrong  is  the  personal  one.  A  so- 
ciety, a  community,  does  not,  cannot  advance  very  far  before 
other  means  for  the  settlement  of  wrongs  are  adopted.  A  gov- 
ernment of  a  very  crude  sort,  yet  a  government,  is  formed. 
Laws  are  formulated,  courts  instituted,  duties  prescribed,  penal- 
ties fixed,  responsibilities  assumed,  and  obligations  imposed. 
Among  the  duties  of  government  is  the  preservation  of  the 
peace.  "The  primary  duty  of  government  is  the  preservation 
of  peace.  There  can  be  no  society,  no  community,  however 
loose  the  bond  or  however  narrow  the  sphere,  without  some 
means  for  maintaining  order.  The  genesis  of  government  is  the 
beginning  of  peace.1  That  such  was  the  effort  of  early  societies 
is  shown  by  their  codes,  for  "the  Ripurian  and  Salian  codes  are 
practically  catalogues  of  crimes  and  penalties,"  and  the  same  is 
largely  true  of  the  early  English  codes. 

SELF-REDRESS. 

The  practice  of  early  peoples  was  self-redress.  Private  re- 
venge and  personal  redress  for  injuries  seems  to  have  been  the 
general  practice.  This  conclusion  can  only  be  reached  in  some 
cases  through  survivals  and  indirect  methods.  The  Twelve 
Tables  of  the  Roman  Law  permitted  a  creditor  to  act  as  his 
own  constable  and  to  keep  the  debtor  in  his  own  goal.  How- 
ever the  debtor  must  be  first  taken  before  the  pretor.  By  389 
A.  D.  private  redress  was  ended.2 

toward.     Development  of  the  King's  Peace,  Uni.  Neb.  Studies,  1:235  ff. 
2Ibid,. 

NOTE — Howard's  foot  notes  are  very  copious  and  helpful.This  article  is  highly  com- 
mended to  the  reader  as  a  study  of  the  origin  and  development  of  the  King's  Peace. 


WEALTH  AND  THE  LAW  59 

BLOOD-FEUD. 

In  case  of  murder  the  offended  party  could  not  demand  satis- 
faction. So  under  the  system  of  self-redress  the  custom  arose 
for  the  next  of  kin  to  become  revenger.  The  family  was  the 
unit,  and  out  of  the  enlarged  family  sprang  the  clan  and  tribe, 
soon  such  became  the  juristic  unit.  It  is  readily  seen  that  this 
primitive  method  of  settling  disputes  tended  to  create  disastrous 
and  long  continued  struggles.  These  struggles  sometimes  were 
within  the  family,  clan,  tribe  and  sometimes  between  families, 
clans  and  tribes.  Howard1  shows  that  the  terms  clan  and  peace 
are  equivalent  terms.  Among  the  Israelites  an  entire  family  or 
tribe  was  punished  for  the  sin  of  a  single  offender.  See  Judges 
19  to  21  and  2nd  Samuel  21:  1-14. 

Keller  finds  that  among  the  Homeric  Greeks  it  was  blood 
for  blood,  "the  blood  vengeance  fell  upon  the  offender's  blood- 
kin  and  community,  upon  women  and  innocent  children.  Man- 
slaughter within  one's  own  community  or  tribe  drew  down  im- 
mediate blood-vengeance  from  the  brothers  and  other  relatives 
of  the  slain  man.2  The  son  felt  called  upon  to  avenge  the  mur- 
der of  father,  brother  of  brother,  etc. 

Among  the  ancient  Irish  if  the  guilty  could  not  or  would  not 
pay  the  fine,  the  fine  was  levied  on  the  guiltless  relatives. 


CHAPTER  II. 

COMPENSATIONS. 

WEEGELD  OR  MAN  VALUE. 

Self-redress  could  not  meet  all  cases.  The  Blood-Feud  was 
unsatisfactory.  An  eye  for  an  eye  did  not  long  continue  to 
meet  the  demands  even  of  a  primitive  age,  and  again  it  placed 
all  men  on  a  plane  of  equality.  Hence  some  other  method  was 
necessary.  So  instead  of  demanding  and  seeking  blood  for  blood 
a  tariff  of  values  was  established.  No  longer  did  each  man  act 
as  his  own  sheriff,  jury,  judge  and  executioner.  The  wergeld  is 

toward.     King's  Peace,  239.  2Keller.     Homeric  Society,  283. 

NOTE — The  Greek,  the  Semitic  and  the  Aryan  peoples  followed  the  same  custom. 
The  Blood  Feud  is  treated  by  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semities,  251,  252,  254,  256. 


60  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

of  early  use,  as  is  seen  by  a  study  of  the  early  codes.  It  pre- 
vailed among  the  Homeric  Greeks,  Achilles  is  censured  for  not 
accepting  the  offer  of  reparation  made  by  Agamemnon.  It  was 
practiced  by  the  Germans.  In  Babylon  the  wergeld  was  a  state 
penalty.1 

Says  Howard,  "speaking  broadly,  throughout  the  entire  Ger- 
man world,  when  history  dawns,  the  state  or  volksverband  has 
already  gained  the  acceptance  of  her  intervention  in  clan  dis- 
putes. In  practice  if  not  in  theory,  the  unrestricted  blood-feud 
is  extinct.  In  its  place  we  find  a  vast  system  of  compositions 
and  penalties  which  the  clan  is  allowed  to  administer,  but  under 
some  restraint,  however  feeble,  of  a  law  superior  to  her  own."2 
In  the  trial  scene  described  by  Homer,  Iliad,  Bk.  XVIII,  501  ff., 
the  two  talents  of  gold  placed  before  the  gerontes  were  probably 
blood- money.3 

The  method  of  satisfying  offended  justice  by  the  use  of  the 
wergeld  had  certain  limitations  at  first.  "The  avenger  was  not 
obliged  to  receive  the  commutation  or  wergeld  offered,  though 
it  was  sometimes  accepted,  for  a  very  near  relative.  Many  a 
man  has  received  an  indemnity  from  the  murderer  of  his  own 
brother,  or  even  of  his  own  son,  when  he  (the  victim)  was  dead; 
and  he  (the  murderer)  had  remained  there,  in  the  country,  after 
paying  a  great  fine  and  his  (the  avenger's)  heart  and  noble  soul 
have  been  stayed  by  the  receiving  of  the  penalty."4 

The  introduction  of  the  wergeld  produced  a  marked  change 
in  the  settlement  of  wrongs.  It  made  it  possible  for  men  of 
wealth  to  possess  superior  power,  to  avoid  bodily  suffering  and 
punishment,  it  gave  to  such  a  larger  liberty  to  violate  law  and 
to  escape  most  easily  its  infractions.  Also  it  gave  to  such 
greater  protection  as  will  be  shown  in  the  next  paragraph.  It 
must  be  noted  that  when  the  wergeld  is  collective  there  is  no 
social  power  to  wealth.  For  when  a  person  commits  a  crime 
and  has  to  depend  upon  the  clan  or  tribe  to  pay  the  wergeld, 
the  payment  yields  no  social  power  to  the  violator,  but  when  it 
is  an  individual  payment  then  it  does  yield  social  power.  In 
the  former  case,  however,  to  the  clan  that  makes  the  payment 

1Cherry.     Lectures  on  The  Growth  of  Criminal  Law  in  Ancient  Communities,  10. 

'Howard,     King's  Peace,  250. 

3Hern.     Aryan  Household,  435,  foot  note. 

^Keller.     Homeric  Society,  285. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  61 

there  comes  an  advantage.  When  life  is  exacted  for  life,  all 
lives  are  of  equal  value.  But  when  there  is  a  varying  money 
value,  varying  values  can  be  and  are  placed  on  lives  and  social 
distinctions  arise. 

WERGELD  AND  RANK. 

Not  only  was  there  a  payment  varying  according  to  the  enor- 
mity of  the  offense  but  the  payment  varied  according  to  the 
rank  of  the  party  against  whom  the  offense  was  committed. 
This  gave  those  of  the  higher  ranks  the  greater  protection.  Also 
members  of  the  higher  ranks  were  often  required  to  pay  less 
when  they  committed  an  offense  against  a  person  of  a  lower 
rank. 

The  wer  (in  Celtic  law  the  honor-price)  was  the  regular  price 
of  a  man  fixed  according  to  his  rank,  and  was  paid  to  his  rela- 
tives in  case  of  his  death.  This  was  purely  a  personal  value 
estimated  according  to  a  man's  rank  and  position.1  The  "bot" 
was  paid  to  the  relatives  as  compensation  for  crime.  This  va- 
ried according  to  the  nature  of  the  act.  The  "wite"  was  a  fine 
paid  to  the  king  as  penalty  for  the  breach  of  his  peace. 

"Some  passages  of  the  laws  assume  that  a  King  or  chief 
might  elect  to  base  his  'honor-price'  on  the  amount  of  his  pos- 
sessions. This  is  an  extremely  interesting  fact,  as  showing  that 
the  great  importance  of  wealth  is  not,  as  is  generally  supposed, 
peculiar  to  modern  society."2  "By  the  Lex  Salica  the  fine  was 
paid  in  money,  and  varied  according  to  the  rank,  sex,  and  age 
of  the  murdered  person."3 

This  same  principle  is  found  in  the  early  English  laws  of 
Aethelbirht,  Hlothhaere,  Eadric,  Wihtraed,  Ine,  Alfred,  Edward, 
Aethelstan,  Edmund,  Edgar,  Etheldred,  Dun-Setas,  Cnut,  and 
Edward  the  Confessor.4  Among  the  Semitic  people  the  prac- 
tice was  not  so  general,  this  was  due  to  strong  religious  influ- 
ence. Legal  codes  formed  under  strong  religious  influence  show 
a  marked  contrast  to  the  codes  not  so  formed.  Payment  of  fines 
came  very  slowly  and  were  much  less  general  among  many  an- 
cient people,  as  among  the  Celts.5  With  the  Jew  human  life 
was  sacred.  Man  was  created  in  the  image  of  God.  "He  that 
smiteth  a  man,  so  that  he  die,  shall  be  surely  put  to  death."6 

Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  83.  2Ibid,  23.  'Ibid,  11, 

<Sterns.     Germs  and^Development  of  the  Laws  of  England. 

8Cherry.    .Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  42.  8Exodus,  21:12. 


62  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

The  absence  of  class  distinctions  among  the  Jews  may  ac- 
count for  the  absence  of  a  system  of  fines  of  varying  amounts. 
Judaism  never  favored  the  compounding  of  a  crime  by  a  money 
payment.  The  Mohammedan  law  allowed  relatives  of  the  mur- 
dered to  elect  to  accept  a  fine  or  to  put  the  murderer  to  death. 
"In  case  of  unintentional  homicide,  a  two  months'  consecutive 
fast  set  the  offender  free."1  The  code  of  Manu  is  especially 
free  from  money  considerations  for  crimes  and  from  class  legis- 
lation. 

Under  the  Brehon  Law,  the  amount  of  the  fine  was  deter- 
mined (1)  by  the  nature  of  the  act,  (2)  the  rank  of  the  person 
injured,  (3)  by  the  rank  of  the  person  committing  the  crime. 
It  must  be  remembered  that  wealth  was  the  principal  factor  in 
determining  rank  among  the  Celts. 

With  the  exception  of  the  clergy  the  possession  of  wealth 
was  the  basis  of  the  grading  the  wer.  The  ownership  of  land 
was  made  an  important  consideration.  "And  if  a  'ceorlish'  man 
thrive,  so  that  he  have  V  hides  of  land  for  the  king's  'ut-ware' 
and  any  one  slay  him,  let  him  be  paid  for  with  two  thousand 
thrymeas."  However  the  possession  of  other  property  answered 
the  same  purpose,  "and  though  he  thrive,  so  that  he  have  a  helm 
of  coat  of  mail,  and  a  sword  ornamented  with  gold,  if  he  have 
not  that  land,  he  is  nevertheless  a  'Ceorl'."2 

WEALTH  AND  PROTECTION. 

By  making  the  penalty  severer  and  higher  for  offenses  com- 
mitted against  those  of  wealth  and  rank,  intending  offenders 
would  be  less  willing  to  commit  the  crime,  thus  this  gives  greater 
protection  to  the  rich. 

The  Brehon  law  sanctified  the  space  around  a  person's  dwel- 
ling to  the  distance  to  which  a  speer  could  be  thrown.  For 
people  of  rank  the  space  was  multiples  of  this  distance.3  Cherry 
quotes  from  the  fourth  book  of  the  ancient  Law  of  Ireland, 
"The  spear  measures  twelve  'fists'  between  the  iron  head  and 
the  place  where  the  horn  is  put  into  the  extremity,  i.  e,  the  ex- 
tremity of  the  handle.  Now  the  shot  of  this  which  the  bo-aire 
chief  casts  as  he  sits  in  the  door  of  his  house  is  the  extent  of  the 

Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  54. 
2Sterns.     Germs  and  Development,  115. 
3Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  34. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  63 

inviolable  precinct  of  the  bo-aire  chief  respecting  his  'seds'  and 
the  aire-desa'  chief  has  twice  this  extent;  and  every  grade  from 
that  up  to  the  King  of  a  territory  has  double  it,  i.  e.,  the  King 
of  a -territory  has  sixty-four  shots  as  the  extent  of  his  inviolable 
precinct,  and  it  is  by  the  green,  these  shots  are  measured  for 
every  inviolable  precinct;  and  where  there  are  discharged  from 
the  place  where  they  (the  parties) 'constantly  sit."1 

The  view  is  held  by  some  that  the  object  of  making  the  fine 
higher  for  crimes  committed  against  persons  of  wealth  and  rank 
was  not  to  secure  to  them  better  protection  but  merely  to  res- 
train such  from  committing  acts  of  violence  and  thus  involving 
men  of  power  and  means  in  warfare.  Thus  a  large  fine  tends 
to  preserve  the  peace.  This  argument  may  have  some  truth 
but  it  does  not  in  any  way  lessen  the  argument  that  wealth  and 
rank  secures  protection  to  those  who  possess  them.  That  a 
large  fine  had  a  restraining  effect  was  taught  by  the  Gentoo 
Laws.  "From  a  man  that  is  rich,  a  larger  Fine,  than  that  res- 
pectively specified  thall  be  taken,  that,  feeling  the  Inconve- 
niences of  the  Mulet,  from  the  Fear  thereof,  he  may  be  res- 
trained from  the  commission  of  such  crimes  a  second  time."2 
Siegel  in  his  Lectures  on  Slavonic  Law  in  describing  Poland 
says,  "the  knights  were  guarded  from  transgressions  by  the 
higher  pecuniary  fines,  had  real  property,  and  were  freed  from 
a  great  many  burdens  in  exchange  for  their  military  chivalry 
service  but  did  not  take  part  in  political  life  until  1370. "3 

The  code  of  Hammurabi,  which  contains  laws  enacted  by  a 
Babylonian  King  who  reigned  about  3,000  years  B.  C.,  furnishes 
some  valuable  data.  With  the  exception  of  law  number  8  the 
rich  man  is  favored.  "If  a  man  has  stolen  an  ox  or  sheep  or  ass 
or  pig,  or  ship,  whether  from  the  temple  or  the  palace,  he  shall 
pay  thirty  fold,  If  he  be  a  poor  man,  he  shall  render  ten  fold. 
If  the  thief  has  nought  to  pay  he  shall  be  put  to  death."4 

Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  28.          2Hastings.     Gentoo  Laws,  321-322. 
3Siegel.     Lectures  on  Slavonic  Law,  111.       4Johns.     Code  of  Hammurabi,  43-48. 


64  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 


CHAPTER  III. 


CODES. 

HAMMURABI. 

The  following  laws  are  taken  from  the  code  of  Hammurabi 
to  which  reference  was  made  in  the  last  chapter.  They  are 
self-explanatory,  but  little  comment  is  necessary.  "If  a  man 
has  caused  the  loss  of  a  gentleman's  eye,  his  eye  one  shall  cause 
to  be  lost."1  197.  "If  he  has  shattered  a  gentleman's  limb,  one 
shall  shatter  his  limb."  But  (198)  "If  he  has  caused  a  poor 
man  to  lose  his  eye  or  shatter  a  poor  man's  limb,  he  shall  pay 
one  mina  of  silver."  Thus  the  gentleman  is  secured  better  pro- 
tection. 199.  "If  he  has  caused  the  loss  of  the  eye  of  a  gentle- 
man's servant  or  has  shattered  the  limb  of  a  gentleman's  ser- 
vant, he  shall  pay  half  his  price."  200.  "If  a  man  has  made 
the  tooth  of  a  man  that  is  his  equal  to  fall  out,  one  shall  make 
his  tooth  fall  out."  201.  "If  he  has  made  the  tooth  of  a  poor 
man  to  fall  out,  he  shall  pay  one-third  of  a  mina  of  silver." 

202.  "If  a  man  has  struck  the  strength  of  a  man  who  is 
great  above  him,  he  shall  be  struck  in  the  assembly  with  sixty 
strokes  of  a  cow-hide  whip."  203.  "If  a  man  of  gentle  birth 
has  struck  the  strength  of  a  man  of  gentle  birth  who  is  like 
himself,  he  shall  pay  one  mina  of  silver."  204.  If  a  poor  man 
has  struck  the  strength  of  a  poor  man,  he  shall  pay  ten  shekels 
of  silver." 

205.  "If  a  gentleman's  servant  has  struck  the  strength  of  a  free 
man,  one  shall  cut  off  his  ear."  206.  "If  a  man  has  struck  a 
man  in  a  quarrel,  and  has  caused  him  a  wound,  that  man  shall 
swear  'I  do  not  strike  him  knowingly'  and  shall  answer  for  the 
doctor." 

207.  "If  he  has  died  of  his  blows,  he  shall  swear,  and  if  he 
be  of  gentle  birth,  he  shall  pay  half  a  mina  of  silver."  208.  "If 
he  be  the  son  of  a  poor  man  he  shall  pay  one-third  of  a  mina  of 
silver." 

209.  "If  a  man  has  struck  a  gentleman's  daughter  and  caused 
hereto  drop  what  is  in  her  womb,  he  shall  pay  ten  shekels  of 

iJohns.     Code  of  Hammurabi,  Law,  8,  3. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  65 

silver  for  what  was  in  her  womb."  210.  "If  that  woman  has 
died  one  shall  put  to  death  his  daughter."  211.  " If  the  daughter 
of  a  poor  man  through  his  blows  he  has  caused  to  drop  that 
which  is  in  her  womb,  he  shall  pay  five  shekels  of  silver."  212. 
"If  that  woman  has  died  he  shall  pay  half  a  mina  of  silver." 

213.  "If  he  has  struck  a  gentleman's  maid  servant  and  caused 
her  to  drop  that  which  is  in  her  womb,  he  shall  pay  two  shekels 
of  silver."  214.  "If  that  maid  servant  has  died  he  shall  pay 
one-third  of  a  mina  of  silver." 

CODE  OF  GENTOO. 

To  understand  this  code  it  is  necessary  to  state  the  theory 
of  creation  as  held  by  these  ancient  people. 

"The  Principle  of  Truth  having  first  formed  the  Earth,  and 
the  Heavens,  and  the  Water,  and  the  Fire,  produced  a  Being, 
called  Burmah,  the  Pewtah,1  for  the  creation  of  all  beings.  Af- 
terwards he  created  the  Bramin  from  his  mouth,  the  Chebteree 
from  his  Arms,  the  Bice  from  his  Thighs,  and  Sooder  from  his 
Feet."'  Bramin  ranks  first  and  always  enjoys  special  privileges. 
His  duty  is  to  read  the  Beids  (Gentoo  Scriptures). 

So  far  as  the  writer  can  discover,  the  possession  of  wealth 
yielded  no  social  prestige,  but  that  rank  and  caste  were  founded 
on  birth  and  religion  was  the  underlying  principle.  Here  is  found 
the  prestige  of  Sanctity. 

This  code  is  another  evidence  that  legal  systems  which  deve- 
lop under  strong  religious  influence  do  not  recognize  wealth  as 
a  basis  for  social  and  legal  gradations. 

A  man  of  the  higher  cast  is  favored  by  the  law  of  interest. 
"If  a  loan  be  granted  to  a  Man  of  the  Chebteree  cast,  in  that 
case,  when  Bramin  pays,  interest  one  Rupee,  the  Chebteree  shall 
pay  one  Rupee  Eight  Annas,  when  the  Bramin  is  charged  one 
Rupee  Two  Annas,  his  interest  shall  be  one  Rupee  Eleven  Annas; 
and  in  the  place  of  Two  Rupees,  the  Chebteree  shall  give  Three." 
"If  a  loan  be  granted  to  a  Man  of  the  Bice  Cast,  he  shall  be 
charged  double  the  Interest  of  a  Bramin."  "If  a  loan  be  granted 
to  a  Man  of  the  Sooder  cast,  in  that  case,  where  the  Bramin 
pays  Interest  one  Rupee,  the  Sooder  shall  pay  Two  Rupees 
Eight  Annas."3 

!NoTE— "Pewtah"  is  that  to  which  all  offer  their  worship. 
2Hasting8.     Gentoo  Laws,  35.  8Ibid,  3. 


66  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

The  following  laws  show  the  three  principal  bases  that  were 
recognized  in  levying  a  fine.  "If  a  man  of  an  equal  cast,  and 
of  equal  Abilities  with  another,  makes  him  become  falsely  sus- 
pected of  the  crime  of  Atee  Patuk,1  the  Magistrate  shall  fine 
him  one  Thousand  Puns  of  Cowries,"  but,  If  a  Man  of  an  inferior 
cast  to  another,  and  also  of  inferior  Abilities,  falsely  makes  him 
suspected  of  the  Crime  of  Atee  Patuk,  the  Magistrate  shall  fine 
him  Two  Thousand  Puns  of  Cowries,"  yet,  "If  a  man  of  superior 
Cast  and  of  superior  Abilities  to  another,  falsely  causes  him  to 
be  suspected  of  the  Crime  of  Atee  Patuk,  the  Magistrate  shall 
fine  him  Five  Hundred  Puns  of  Cowries."2 

In  the  case  of  "Maha  Patuk"  the  fine  is  respectively,  Five 
Hundred  for  a  man  falsely  accusing  a  man  of  equal  Cast  and 
of  equal  Abilities,  but  if  the  accuser  is  of  inferior  Cast  and  of 
inferior  abilities  the  fine  is  One  Thousand  Puns  of  Cowries,  but 
if  a  man  of  superior  Cast  and  superior  abilities  falsely  accuses 
a  Man  of  inferior  Cast  and  inferior  abilities  the  fine  is  only  Two 
Hundred  and  Fifty  Puns  of  Cowries.3 

As  a  guide  to  the  Magistrate  this  law  is  given  "In  any  Affair 
when  the  Cast  and  Science  of  the  Party  are  mentioned,  a  Fine 
shall  be  taken,  according  to  the  Amount  at  which  that  parti- 
cular Cast  and  Science  are  rated."4 

In  some  cases  of  assault  the  same  principle  held,5  while  in 
others  the  fines  were  One  Hundred,  Forty  and  Twenty  Puns  of 
Cowries,  according  to  the  cast  of  the  offender.6 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that,  "If  a  Man  deprives  another  of 
Life,  the  Magistrate  shall  deprive  that  Person  of  life;  if  a  Bramin 
deprive  any  Person  of  Life,  the  Bramin's  Life  shall  not  be  taken 
in  return,  but  he  shall  be  fined  One  Hundred  Ashrusies.  A 
Bramin  shall  not  be  put  to  death  upon  any  Account  whatever."7 

In  the  Case  of  theft  there  is  a  varying  scale  of  punishments, 
"If  a  man  steals  a  Man  of  a  superior  Cast,  the  Magistrate  shall 
bind  the  Grass  Beena  round  his  Body,  and  burn  him  with  fire; 
if  he  steals  a  Woman  of  a  superior  Cast,  the  Magistrate  shall 
cause  him  to  be  stretched  out  upon  a  hot  Plate  of  Iron,  and, 
having  bound  the  Grass  Beena  round  his  Body,  shall  burn  him 

111  Atee  Patuk"  is  incest  with  one's  own  mother,  daughter  or  with  a  son's  wife. 
'Ibid,  206-207. 

"Hastings.     Gentoo  Laws,  35.  "Ibid,  215.  BIbid,  217.  "Ibid,  220. 

'Ibid,  233. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  67 

in  the  Fire."  but,  "If  a  Person  steals  a  Man  or  Woman  of  a 
middling  cast,  the  Magistrate  shall  cut  off  both  Hands  and  Feet, 
and  cast  him  out  upon  a  Highway  where  Four  Roads  meet;" 
yet,  "If  a  Person  steals  a  Man  of  an  inferior  cast,  the  Magistrate 
shall  fine  him  One  Thousand  Puns  of  Cowries;  if  he  steals  a 
Woman  of  an  inferior  Cast,  the  Magistrate  shall  confiscate  all 
his  property."1 

Three  kinds  of  adultery  were  recognized  and  the  fines  are 
Two  Hundred  and  Fifty,  Five  Hundred  and  One  Thousand  Puns 
of  Cowries,  but  if  Man  of  wealth  commit  any  of  these  crimes, 
"a  still  larger  fine  shall  be  taken."2 

In  case  a  man  incurred  a  debt  and  was  unable  to  pay  the 
same  on  account  of  famine  or  some  similar  calamity,  the  creditor 
could  not  force  payment  but  must  be  content  to  accept  the  pay- 
ment of  the  debt  in  small  payments.3 

That  the  rich  were  not  favored  is  seen  by  this  law,  "If  a 
Man  bring  a  claim  against  any  person,  saying  'you  owe  me  a 
Sum  of  Money,'  and  that  Person  denies  the  Debt,  that  Person, 
if  he  be  rich  shall  be  fined  Twice  as  much  as  the  Debt;  if  he 
be  a  Man  of  inconsiderable  Property,  he  shall  be  fined  a  Sum 
equivalent  to  the  Debt."4  5 

"After  being  acquainted  with  the  Fines  stated  for  each  parti- 
cular species  of  Theft,  as  mentioned  in  the  Chapter  on  theft,  if 
a  Sooder  commits  a  Robbery,  Vie  shall  pay  Eight  Times  as  much; 
if  a  Bice,  he  shall  pay  Sixteen  Times  as  much;  if  a  Chebteree, 
he  shall  pay  a  Fine  of  Thirty-Two  Times  as  much;  if  he  be  a 
Bramin  he  shall  pay  Sixty-four  Times  as  much;  if  he  be  a  Bramin 
of  Extensive  Knowledge,  he  shall  pay  One  Hundred  Times  as 
much;  if  he  be  a  Man  of  the  greatest  Rank,  he  shall  be  fined 
One  Hundred  and  Twenty  Times  as  much."6  This  law  reveals 
a  practice  quite  the  contrary  to  the  practice  found  in  the  codes. 
The  probable  explanation  is,  that  knowledge  was  most  important 
and  if  one  who  possessed  superior  knowledge  and  belonged  to  a 
superior  cast  committed  a  crime  he  was  fined  in  proportion  to 
his  rank. 

iHastings,     Gentoo  Laws,  248.  2Ibid,  268.  3Ibid,  313.  <Ibid,  313. 

8NoTE — Crime  committed  against  a  woman  is  regarded  as  a  more  serious  offense 
than  when  committed  against  a  man  and  a  greater  fine  is  fixed. 
6Hastings.     Gentoo  Laws,  320. 


68  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

ISRAELITISH  LAW. 

The  Levitical  and  Deuteronomic  codes  are  also  of  interest. 
Like  the  laws  of  Manu,  Hammurabi  and  Gentoo,  these  laws  de- 
veloped under  a  strong  religious  influence  and  they  do  not  in 
any  respect  show  favor  to  the  man  of  wealth.  A  few  passages  are 
given  to  show  that  the  poor  were  not  to  be  oppressed.  "  Ye  shall 
not  afflict  any  widow,  or  fatherless  child."1  "And  thou  shalt 
not  glean  thy  vineyard,  neither  shalt  thou  gather  the  fallen  fruit 
of  thy  vineyard;  thou  shalt  leave  them  for  the  poor  and  for  the 
stranger:  I  am  the  Lord  your  God.  Ye  shall  do  no  unrighteous- 
ness in  judgment.  Thou  shalt  not  respect  the  person  of  the  poor, 
nor  honour  the  person  of  the  mighty:  but  in  righteousness  shalt 
thou  judge  thy  neighbour."2 

This  law  is  a  growth  and  not  a  spontaneous  production,  "it 
was  in  reality  the  result  of  a  process  of  selection,  modification 
and  elimination,  affected  by  many  and  varied  influences."3  This 
makes  these  laws  of  much  value  for  the  present  purpose,  for 
they  cover  a  long  period  of  time  and  represent  both  early  and 
late  periods  of  civilization. 

Penalties  for  almost  every  conceivable  wrong  were  provided, 
but  there  is  no  class  distinction  or  immunity  except  for  the 
priest  craft. 

Exodus  13:  20  to  24  and  34  may  be  designated  as  the  primi- 
tive Israelitish  codes.  They  represent,  although  only  partially, 
the  growth  of  Israelitish  law  from  the  earliest  times  to  about 
750  B.  C.4  Later  codes  are  found  in  Ezekiel  40  to  48. 

TABLES  OF  GORTYNA. 

The  Twelve  Tables  of  Gortyna5  which  represent  the  early 
law  of  Doric  Greek  (Crete)  represent  a  type  of  civilization  in 
which  social  and  political  status  rather  than  wealth  was  the  basis 
of  classification  and  the  fines  are  made  in  accordance  with  this 
fact.  Three  classes  of  persons  were  recognized.  (1)  Freemen, 
(2)  Clubless  persons,  who  were  either  freedmen  or  other  unpri- 
vileged citizens,  and  (3)  Slaves.  Two  classes  of  slaves  existed; 
(a)  city  slaves  purchased  for  money,  and  (b)  country  slaves, 
persons  who  had  been  enslaved  by  war.  The  relative  value 

lExodus,  22:22.  'Lev.,  19:10,  15. 

launders  and  Kent.     Biblical  and  Semitic  Studies,  43.  4Ibid,  71, 

The  Twelve  Tables  of  Gortyna,  136-137. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  69 

of  these  classes,  in  case  of  fines,  for  freeman,  one  hundred  staters, 
clubless  person,  ten  staters,  a  slave  one-half  stater.  In  case  a 
slave  committed  an  injury  he  paid  twice  the  fine  imposed  on  a 
freeman.  Rape  and  adultery  were  treated  as  matters  for  pri- 
vate compensation.  If  a  freeman  commit  one  of  these  crimes, 
he  paid  one  hundred  staters  but  if  a  slave  committed  a  similar 
act  with  a  free  person  he  was  fined  two  hundred  staters.  If 
one  lie  by  force  with  a  freeman  or  a  freewoman,  he  shall  restore 
a  hundred  staters,  but  if  with  (the  man  or  woman)  of  a  clubless 
person,  ten  staters.  If  a  slave  (force)  a  freeman  or  freewoman, 
he  shall  restore  twofold,  and  if  a  freeman  (force)  a  male  or 
female  house  holder,  five  drachms;  and  if  a  male  house  holder 
(force)  a  male  or  female  house  holder,  five  staters.1  If  one  be 
taken  in  adultery  with  a  free  woman  in  (her)  father's  (house), 
or  in  (her)  brother's,  or  in  her  man's,  he  shall  restore  a  hundred 
staters,  but  if  in  another's,  fifty  staters.  But  if  (he)  be  a  slave 
(be  taken)  with  a  freewoman,  he  shall  restore  twofold:  if  a  slave 
with  a  slave,  five  (staters). 

ANGLO-SAXON. 

The  early  law  codes  of  England  show  (a)  how  the  payment 
for  a  crime  could  be  made  in  money  and,  (b)  that  there  was  a 
scale  of  fines  for  the  same  offense,  but  committed  by  persons 
of  different  social  standings.  These  fines  show  that  when  a  per- 
son of  an  upper  class  committed  a  crime  he  paid  less,  and  that 
when  an  offense  was  committed  against  a  member  of  the  higher 
rank  by  one  of  a  lower  order  the  offender  had  to  pay  a  higher 
fine.2 

All  offenses,  even  capital  crimes  were  payable  in  "bot"  or 
money-fines  as  early  as  Aethelbriht's  time,  A.  D.  560-606.  In 
order  to  carry  out  this  system  a  fixed  schedule  of  values  to 
everything  was  made.  The  classes  recognized  under  this 
legal  process  were — the  King,  the  bishop,  the  ealderman,  the 
earl,  the  freeman,  the  ceorl  and  the  esne.  The  standard  of 
value  was  the  freeman,  those  above,  being  ranked  successively 
higher,  those  below — lower.8 

1A.  stater  was  equal  to  about  67  cents.     The  drachm  was  equal  to  half  a  silver  stater. 
'Sterns.     Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England,  23.  *Ibid,  24. 


70  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

CLASS  GRADATIONS. 

"Theows,"  who  were  slaves  by  birth  was  the  name  given  to 
the  lowest  class.  "Wite  Theows"  were  those  who  had  been 
reduced  to  slavery  on  account  of  inability  to  pay  fines.  "Esne," 
was  a  hireling  in  a  senile  condition.  Freeman  was  one  under 
duty  to  a  lord  or  King  from  whom  he  held  lands  under  tenure. 
"Hoet,"  a  class  between  servile  and  free;  of  this  class  there  were 
three  ranks.  Earls,  held  offices  of  honor  and  in  turn  came  to  have 
a  part  in  governmental  affairs.  Ealdormen  were  those  who  exer- 
cised the  power  over  the  Kingdoms  of  the  Heptarchy.  This 
office  later  passed  to  the  Earls.1 

The  laws  of  King  Aethelbirht  show  clearly  that  the  distinc- 
tion of  rank  was  strictly  observed.  "If  a  freeman  steal  from 
the  King,  let  him  pay  nine-fold,  but  if  a  freeman  steal  from  a 
freeman  let  him  make  "bot"  and  let  the  King  have  all  the  "wite" 
and  all  the  chattels."  "If  a  man  lie  with  the  King's  maiden, 
let  him  pay  a  "bot"  of  XXX  shillings,  or  if  the  third  (class)XII 
shillings." 

If  a  man  slay  another  in  the  King's  "tun"  let  him  make 
"bot"  with  L  shillings,  but,  if  a  man  slay  another  in  an  Earl's 
"tun,"  let  him  make  "bot"  with  XII  shillings.  "If  a  man  lie 
with  a  ceorl's  birele  (a  superior  slave)  let  him  make  "bot"  with 
VI  shillings;  with  a  slave  of  the  second  (class)  L  Scaeths  (a 
small  coin) ;  with  one  of  the  third — XXX  Scaeths.  If  (any  one) 
slay  a  "lact"  of  the  highest  class,  let  him  pay  LXXX  shillings; 
if  he  slay  one  of  the  second,  let  him  pay  LX  shillings;  if  the 
third  let  him  pay  XI  shillings. 

Law  75  illustrates  this  same  principle  in  another  phase  of 
life.  For  the  "Mund"  of  a  widow  of  the  best  class,  if  an  "Earl's" 
degree,  let  the  "bot"  be  L  shillings.  Of  the  second,  XX  shil- 
lings; of  the  third,  XII  shillings;  of  the  fourth,  VI  shillings. 
The  Laws  of  King  Hlothhaere  and  Eadice  who  lived  about  670 
A.  D.  or  60  years  after  the  death  of  Aethelbirht,  teach 
that  "if  any  one's  'esne'  slay  a  man  if  an  'Earl's'  degree, 
whoever  it  be,  let  the  owner  pay  with  three  hundred  shillings, 
give  up  the  slayer,  and  add  three  'man  wyriths'  thereto.  But 
if  it  should  be  a  freeman  that  is  slain  the  penalty  is  only  one 
hundred  shillings,  giving  up  the  slayer,  and  a  second  man- 
sterns.  Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England.  (4)  27  ff. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  71 

wyrith."  One  thing  especially  to  be  noted  is  that  in  all  the 
laws,  compensations  for  offenses  can  be  made  in  money. 

The  laws  of  King  Wihtraed  700  A.  D.  "If  a  Gesithund  man, 
a  military  follower  of  the  King,  be  guilty  of  illicit  intercourse, 
he  paid  a  'bot'  of  C  shillings,  but  if  a  'Ceorlish'  man  he  paid 
only  L  shillings."1 

The  Laws  of  King  Ine.  A  law  -which  treats  of  fighting,  and 
the  "bot"  ranges  from  120  to  LX  shillings  according  to  the  rank 
of  the  house  where  the  fighting  takes  place.2 

Laws  of  King  Alfred.  "If  a  man  committed  an  offense 
against  the  person  of  a  woman  the  'bot'  ranged  from  V  to  LX 
shillings,  but  if  this  befall  to  a  woman  more  nobly  born  let 
the  'bot'  increase  according  to  the  'Wer'."3  "If  a  man  lie  with 
the  wife  of  a  twelve-'hynde'  man,  let  him  make  'bot'  to  the 
husband  with  one  hundred  and  twenty  shillings,  to  a  six-'hynde' 
man,  let  him  make  'bot'  with  one  hundred  and  twenty  shillings, 
to  a  'Ceorlish'  man  let  him  make  'bot'  with  forty  shillings."3 

"If  a  man  commit  a  rape  upon  a  'Ceorl's'  female  slave,  let 
him  make  'hot'  to  the  'Ceorl'  with  V  shillings,  and  let  the  'Wite' 
be  LX  shillings."4 

The  18th  of  the  Laws  of  King  Ine,  reads,  "A  'Ceorlish'  man, 
if  he  have  often  been  accused,  if  he  at  last  be  seized,  let  his 
hand  or  foot  be  cut  off."5  Sterns,  commenting  on  this  law 
notes,  that  mutations  and  scourging  were  for  the  slave,  while 
the  master  could  buy  his  peace  with  money.  The  explanation 
is  simple.  A  low  caste  man  as  a  slave  had  no  money  to  pay 
his  fine  with.  This  is  but  another  instance  of  the  Social  Power 
of  Wealth.  Also  the  loss  of  a  member  was  a  life  long  loss  while 
a  money  fine  was  soon  paid.6 

LAW  OF  PERSON  AND  PROPERTY. 

The  history  of  law  shows  that  both  in  the  making  and  in 
the  execution  the  rich  have  always  been  favored.  But  the  law 
of  property  has  never  been  as  unjust  or  as  discriminating  in 
favor  of  the  wealthy  as  the  law  of  person.  "All  the  legislation 
concerning  seduction  and  illegitimate  children — matters  which 
involve  the  violation  of  the  honor  of  the  poorer  classes  by  the 

Sterns.     Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England,  (5)  40. 
*Ibid,   (6)  44-45.  3Ibid,   (11)  79.  "Ibid,   (25)  82-83.  "ibid,  (18)  47. 

6NoTE — The  purpose  has  been  to  cite  only  such  laws  as  seemed  to  be  related  to  the 
question  under  consideration. 


72  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

rich,  is  exclusively  inspired  in  the  interests  of  the  latter  and 
tends  to  exempt  the  wealthy  in  every  possible  way  from  the 
consequence  of  their  acts.  The  law  reaches  this  result  by  for- 
bidding the  revelation  of  paternity,  by  refusing  to  give  illegiti- 
mate children  any  right  to  the  father's  possessions  and  by  other 
such  means."1  The  Italian  code  treats  with  much  indulgence 
many  crimes  especially  committed  by  the  rich.  While  crimes 
common  to  the  poor  are  severely  punished.  "Theft  under  cer- 
tain aggravating  circumstances  has  to  be  expiated  by  twenty 
years  in  the  galleys,  while  for  swindling,  five  years  in  prison 
suffice,  one  year  is  the  penalty  for  violation  of  the  domicile, 
and  six  months  for  outrages  of  chastity,  while  under  certain 
circumstances  these  crimes  are  merely  punished  by  a  fine  of 
five  hundred  francs."2  The  law  of  Cnut  declared,  "housebreak- 
ing  and  arson,  and  open  theft,  and  open-morth,  and  treason 
against  a  lord  are  by  the  secular  law  bot-less."3  These  offenses 
were  more  likely  to  be  committed  by  the  property-less  class  than 
by  those  of  some  means. 

IMPRISONMENT  FOR  DEBT. 

Among  Homeric  Greeks,  debt  brought  no  "extreme  misery 
or  slavery."4  This  was  probably  due  to  the  fact  that  the  social 
power  of  wealth  was  not  so  marked  as  it  became  later.  The 
ancient  Roman  law,  however,  was  very  severe  against  theft, 
the  offender  often  lost  his  liberty.  "If  the  thief  was  not  in  a 
position  to  pay  the  value  demanded  by  the  injured  party  and 
approved  by  the  Judge,  he  was  assigned  by  the  Judge  to  the 
person  from  whom  he  had  stolen  as  a  bondsman."5  "Thieves 
are  not  usually  found  among  the  wealthier  classes.  However, 
should  one  of  the  wealthier  classes  become  financially  involved 
and  was  compelled  to  borrow  he  was  well  protected  against 
usurous  contracts  but  the  poor  man  enjoyed  no  such  immunity."6 

The  American  Colonies  and  young  states  present  an  interest- 
ing picture  of  the  Social  Power  of  Wealth  in  the  sphere  of  Juris- 
prudence. For  the  smallest  debt  a  person  could  be  cast  into  and 
kept  in  prison,  though  it  be  but  a  cent. 

"By  an  old  law  which  went  back  to  the  days  when  Penn- 

iLoria.     Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  106.  2Ibid,  112. 

3Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  89.  4Keller.     Homeric  Society,  98-99. 

5Cherry.     Growth  of  Criminal  Law,  70. 

6Loria.     Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  107. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  73 

sylvania  was  a  colony,  magistrates  were  allowed  cognizance  with- 
out appeal  of  debts  under  forty  shillings,  or  $5.33.  When  the 
debt  exceeded  that  sum  the  debtor  was  entitled  to  a  stay  of 
execution.  But  no  such  privilege  was  accorded  the  wretch  who 
owed  a  sixpence  or  a  shilling,  and  who  might  if  his  creditors 
chose,  be  dragged  to  jail  on  what  were  truly  called  " spite  ac- 
tions."1 

The  lot  of  the  penniless  debtor  was  while  confined  in  jail  far 
worse  than  that  of  thieves,  murderers  and  felons.  These  were 
fed  at  public  expense,  the  debtor  was  not.  His  prison  room 
was  without  chair,  table,  bed  and  blankets.  The  floor  was  his 
chair,  table  and  bed.  In  New  York  City  during  1816,  1,984 
debtors  were  imprisoned,  1,129  were  in  prison  for  debt  under 
$50.00,  729  for  less  than  $25.00. 

In  Vermont  a  man  contracted  a  debt  for  54c,  to  a  firm  of 
two,  who  divided  the  obligations  and  had  the  man  imprisoned 
for  27c.  The  costs  in  each  action  were,  execution  $1.75,  of- 
ficer's fees  $2.18,  jailer's  fees  50c,  citation  34c,  service  $1.25, 
commissioner's  fees  $1.25,  a  total  for  both  cases  of  $14.54,  so 
the  man  goes  to  prison  because  he  is  too  poor  to  pay  the  ori- 
ginal 54c. 

In  Boston  a  man  was  sent  to  prison  for  contracting  a  grocery 
bill  while  he  lay  ill  with  a  fever.  "In  Philadelphia  forty  prison- 
er's debts  represented  an  aggregate  of  $23.00.  One  man  owed 
2c,  another  72c. 

The  property  of  a  minor  is  much  better  protected  than  his 
person  is.2  A  proprietor  finds  the  law  more  favorable  than  does 
the  non-proprietor.  " Among  the  Marea,  likewise,  an  African 
tribe,  the  thief,  if  he  be  a  noble,  is  only  obliged  to  return  the 
thing  stolen,  but  if  he  be  a  man  of  the  people,  he  is  condemned 
to  give  up  everything  that  he  possesses."3  The  law  of  Hammu- 
rabi presents  a  somewhat  mixed  practice.  "If  a  man  has  stolen 
ox  or  sheep  or  ass  or  pig,  on  ship,  whether  from  the  temple  or 
the  palace,  he  shall  pay  thirty-fold.  If  he  be  a  poor  man  he 
shall  render  ten-fold."4  But  if  perchance  he  had  nothing  to  pay 
he  was  put  to  death.  "If  the  thief  had  nought  to  pay  he  shall 

1McMaster.  The  Acquisition  of  the  Political,  Social  and  Industrial  Rights  of  Man 
in  America,  50-65.  2Ibid,  107. 

'Glasson.     Histoire  du  Droit  de  la  France,  11:567.  quoted  by  Loria. 
4Johns.     Code  of  Hammurabi,  3,  Iaw8. 


74  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

be  put  to  death."  Law  117  indicates  that  an  undue  penalty 
could  not  be  imposed.  "If  a  man  a  debt  has  seized  him,  and 
he  has  given  his  wife,  his  son,  his  daughter  for  the  money,  or 
has  handed  to  work  off  the  debt,  for  three  years  they  shall 
work  in  the  house  of  their  buyer  or  exploiter,  in  the  fourth  year 
he  shall  fix  their  liberty."1 

WITNESSES  AND  RANK. 

According  to  the  Master  and  Servant  Act  of  England,  the 
laborer  could  not  testify  for  himself  but  the  master  could  go  on 
the  witness  stand  and  testify  in  his  own  behalf.  A  person  ac- 
cused of  a  crime  was  privileged  to  bring  witnesses  who  could 
swear  as  to  his  character.  Not  only  the  number  of  witnesses 
was  important  but  the  rank  of  the  same.  The  higher  rank  could 
swear  for  the  lower  but  not  vice  versa.  A  man  of  the  order  of 
a  thane  who  could  produce  twelve  thanes,  of  which  number  he 
counted  one,  could  clear  himself.  "The  oath  of  one  lord  was 
sufficient,  sometimes,  to  clear  a  vassal  or  a  slave.  The  oaths  of 
the  nobility  counted  in  favor  of  inferior  persons  according  to 
their  wergeld  or  legal  value."2 

According  to  the  Twelve  Tables  of  Gortyna  there  were  some 
cases  where  only  freemen  were  allowed  to  witness.  These  laws 
provided  that,  a  freeman  could  clear  himself  from  a  false  accu- 
sation by  his  own  oath  and  that  of  four  compurgators.  Two 
compurgators  were  sufficient  in  case  of  a  clubless  person  and 
the  oath  of  his  lord  and  one  other  set  free  a  slave.3 

Hammurabi,  21,  law  117. 

2Sterns.     Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of  England,  273. 

3Roby.     The  Twelve  Tables  of  Gortyna,  136. 


WEALTH    AND    THE    LAW  75 


CHAPTER    IV. 


INFLUENCE  ON  ADMINISTRATION. 

During  barbarian  times  men  sought  to  accomplish  their  pur- 
poses by  the  use  of  brawn.  If  a  man  found  himself  inferior  to 
his  foe,  through  the  use  of  wealth  he  sought  to  secure  the  aid 
and  support  of  his  fellowmen,  by  the  promise  of  satisfactory  re- 
ward he  secured  fighters — soldiers  to  help  him  fight  his  battles. 
But  in  later  times  wealth  in  the  form  of  bribes  was  used,  for 
it  was  cheaper  to  bribe  than  to  fight. 

The  terms,  "buying  judge  and  jury,"  is  something  more  than 
a  figure  of  speech,  it  expresses  what  has  too  often  taken  place, 
the  favorable  judge  on  the  bench  and  the  favorable  person  in 
the  jury  box.  There  has  been  and  there  still  is  a  disposition  to 
regard  with  favor  the  man  of  wealth.  The  poor  starving  girl 
who  takes  a  loaf  of  bread  to  appease  the  gnawing  hunger  of  her 
younger  sister  is  branded  as  a  thief,  while  the  daughter  of  the 
millionaire  who  purloins  a  dress  pattern  is  called  a  cleptomaniac. 
The  man  who  steals  $5  is  sent  to  jail,  the  bank  president  who 
misappropriates  thousands  goes  "soott  free"  and  besides  is  called 
a  great  and  shrewd  financier. 

In  colonial  Virginia  there  was  a  law  which  forbade  a  man 
marrying  two  women,  because  at  that  time  women  were  scarce. 
It  was  announced  at  church  that  the  guilty,  either  man  or 
woman,  should  "undergo  corporal  correction  or  be  punished  by 
fine  or  otherwise,  according  to  the  quality  of  the  person  so  of- 
fending." Says  Coke,  "if  persons  of  'quality'  indulge  in  this 
dangerous  amusement,  they  are  only  to  be  fined;  all  others  are 
to  be  corporally  corrected  with  good  lashes  on  the  back."1  "It 
was  even  with  the  notions  of  the  time  that  the  scales  of  Justice 
should  slant  a  little  toward  a  plaintiff  or  defendant  of  dignity 
and  a  high-born  felon  did  not  lose  the  benefit  of  his  birth.  In 
Maryland,  for  example,  the  criminal  of  quality  was  to  be  be- 
headed according  to  English  precedent  and  not  hanged  like  a 
vulgar  rogue,  while  Massachusetts  politely  refused  to  send  'any 
true  gentleman'  to  the  whipping  post."2  The  same  tendency 

Esten.     Virginia— A  History  of  the  People,  149.  2Ibid,  144. 


76  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

exists  today.  "Theft  on  Wall  Street  is  measured  by  a  different 
standard  from  that  which  takes  its  spoils  through  Rat  Alley. 
He  who  steals  a  vest  from  a  second  hand  clothing  store  gets  a  ride 
in  the  city  van  without  the  opportunity  of  looking  out  of  the 
window,  but  he  who  swallows  a  moneyed  institution  astonishes 
Central  Park  with  his  equipage."1 

There  has  come  to  be  a  "partiality  of  hemp,"  and  an  "aris- 
tocracy of  the  gallows."2  Two  persons  adjudged  equally  guilty 
of  the  same  offense,  one  without  means,  suffers  the  penalty,  the 
other,  possessing  means,  employs  legal  talent,  appeals  his  case, 
buys  the  service  of  more  legal  talent;  exceptions  are  taken,  de- 
murrers are  filed  and  he  finally  cheats  the  law.  A  person  charged 
with  crime,  has  opportunity  to  evade  the  law  and  escape  its  pen- 
alty in  proportion  to  his  wealth.  The  delays  of  the  law  are 
shown  by  an  Oregon  case  where  a  murderer  sentenced  to  hang 
has  remained  three  years  in  jail  because  he  filed  an  appeal  in 
the  supreme  court.  No  attempt  was  made  to  push  the  pro- 
ceeding and  the  mere  filing  had  the  effect  of  saving  the  man 
from  the  gallows. 

The  shield  of  the  state  has  well  protected  the  man  of  wealth 
and  the  protection  of  law  has  been  for  those  who  had  the  price. 

iTalmage.     Evils  of  the  Cities,  175.  2Ibid,  180. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  77 


PART  IV. 


WEALTH  AND  POLITICAL  INTEREST. 


The  Poor  Man  Does  Not  Count. — McMaster. 
CHAPTER  I. 


EARLY  PRACTICES. 
FEUDALISM. 

Political  interests  form  one  of  the  segments  of  human  acti- 
vity and  within  this  segment  wealth  exercises  a  social  power. 
In  early  times  society  was  an  ever  shifting  bar  of  sand,  and  gov- 
ernment— if  such  rule  as  then  existed  can  be  called  government 
— was  the  will  and  power  of  the  strongest;  but  very  early  in  the 
history  of  a  people,  military  prowess  is  supplanted  in  large  part 
at  least  by  wealth-power  and  political  rights  and  privileges  be- 
come the  appanage  of  the  well-to-do. 

Fustel  de  Coulanges  describing  "L'  Aristocratic  Feodale  au 
VII  Siecle,"1  states  that  the  term  <rleudes,"  (great  vassals  that 
voluntarily  followed  the  King  in  war),  is  not  found  in  "lois 
franques"  nor  in  the  "Chartes"  nor  in  the  "Saints"  but  is  found 
in  the  "Chroniques." 

These  two  terms  are  applied  to  those  who  were  great  by  the 
favor  of  the  prince  or  by  the  functions  or  duty  which  such  ren- 
dered to  him.  This  custom  had  existed  since  the  Roman  Em- 
pire and  had  not  changed  in  the  seventh  century. 

The  creation  of  the  "leudes"  proved  disasterous  to  the  abso- 
lute and  universal  authority  of  the  King,  and  in  time  took  from 
him  much  political  power.  As  early  as  613  this  was  manifest 
and  by  650  these  "leudes"  who  formed  the  external  party  took 
power  into  their  hands.  They  even  raised  troops  without  orders 
from  the  King  and  came  between  the  King  and  the  lowest 
classes.2 

The   growth   of  "propriete"    (property  and   proprietorship) 

Fustel  de  Coulanges.     Les  Transformations  de  la  Royaute,  60.         2Ibid,  71-75. 


78  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

greatly  weakened  the  state  and  consequently  effected  the  poli- 
tical situation.  D'  une  part,  le  droit  de  propriete  ne  fut  par 
mis  en  question  il  garda  toute  sa  puissance,  il  P  accrut  meme". 
L'  impot  foncier,  seul  lien  de  dependance  qui  la  propriete  eut 
avec  T  etat,  fut  insensiblement  supprime  par  le  don  de  V  immu- 
niste  et  la  proprie"t6  se  trouva  ainse  affranchir  de  P  authorite 
publique. 

The  large  proprietors  soon  secured  much  independence.  Plus 
la  grande  propriete  etait  independante  prospere,  plus  elle  pou- 
vait  faire  la  loi  aceux  qui  occipaient  son  sol.  Le  contrat  de 
fermage  disparuet  et  la  concession  en  bienfait  put  sa  place.1 
Les  grands  domaines  alle"rent  grandissant  a  chaque  generation.2 

So  when  the  great  proprietors,  abbots,  bishops  and  laity  be- 
came rich  in  land  and  "fidelles"  they  obtained  immunity  from 
taxes,  the  furnishing  of  soldiers  or  yielding  military  service.  All 
this  indicates  the  shifting  of  political  power.  The  people  began 
to  accept  this  feudalism,  for  the  state  was  oppressive  and  offered 
but  little  and  uncertain  protection.  Taxes  were  exhorbitant  and 
military  service  oppressive.  Que  beau  coup  d'  hommes  renon- 
caient  volontairement  a  leur  condition  d'  hommes  libres,  c'est- 
a-dire  de  subjects  du  roi,  pour  entrer  dans  les  ordres  ecclesias- 
tiques,  ou  se  faire  les  vassaux  d'  un  eveque  ou  d'  un  abbe.  Leur 
motif  n'  etait  pas  la  devotion;  c'etait  le  desir  d'  echapper  au 
service  militaire  et  a  toutes  les  autres  charges  que  1'  etat  im- 
posait  au  citoyen.3  Us  etaint  accables  par  les  corvees,  par  le 
droit  de  gite,  surtout  par  le  service  militaire.  A  se  faire  vassaux, 
au  contraire,  ils  se  procuraient  un  protecteur  puissant  qui  les 
defendait  en  justice  et  les  exemptait  des  charges  publiques.4 

Feudalism  is  a  state  of  society  in  which  individuals  feel  com- 
pelled by  a  sense  of  duty  to  yield  obedience  and  to  give  support 
to  a  superior.  This  superiority  has  for  its  base  wealth.  The 
superior  acquires  and  retains  his  position  through  superiority  of 
arms,  through  judical  acts,  and  through  the  possession  of  wealth. 
In  the  evolution  of  the  system  a  decentralizing  process  takes 
place,  whereby  the  freemen  who  have  secured  arms  and  acquired 
wealth  refuse  longer  to  obey  the  summons  of  the  lord  or  to  fur- 
nish the  sinews  of  warfare  in  time  of  need,  or  means  for  further 
exploitation.  This  process  builds  up  multiplied  centers  of  power 


Coulanges.     Les  Transformations  de  la  Royaute,  705.  2Ibid,  706. 

»Ibid,  567.  <Ibid,  706. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  79 

each  with  its  leader.  These  leaders  are,  "the  great  ones  among 
the  free  subjects  already  in  possession  of  the  advantages  of 
wealth  and  territorial  influence,  (who)  begin  to  make  themselves 
so  many  centers  of  actual  power  and  to  attach  the  lesser  free- 
man to  themselves  by  the  hope  of  action  or  of  defence  in  war, 
and  of  rewards  in  peace."1 

In  the  earlier  stages  of  feudalism  the  binding  tie  was  largely 
political  and  military,  or  perhaps  it  is  better  to  say  military 
means  were  used  to  secure  political  power.  Resplendent  and 
dazzling  as  military  life  and  achievements  were,  the  results  of 
such  a  life  were  so  uncertain  and  unstable  that  it  was  necessary 
to  employ  something  more  sure  to  retain  the  allegiance  of  the 
vassal,  so  by  814,  wealth  in  the  form  of  land  came  into  play  and 
became  the  binding  tie.  It  was  a  case  where  the  liberal  man 
became  powerful,  for  the  larger  the  number  of  fiefs  that  a  lord 
was  able  to  give  the  greater  number  of  vassals  he  was  able  to 
gather  around  him. 

The  point  of  especial  interest  is  that  throughout  the  different 
stages  of  development  of  the  feudal  system  it  was  the  man  of 
wealth,  the  land  owner,  that  was  able  to  command  the  alle- 
giance and  service  of  his  fellow  men. 

It  added  to  the  prestige  of  the  superior,  that  no  "vulgar" 
pay  as  salary  was  paid  by  him  for  services  others  rendered  for 
him,  and  he  received  the  service  as  a  mark  of  his  superiority. 
During  this  period  service  was  divided  into  two  classes,  (1) 
noble,  (2)  ignoble.  The  former  was  that  service  which  was 
rendered  without  pay,  such  as,  in  arms,  on  horse,  presence  and 
aid  at  hunts,  and  tournaments;  the  latter  consisted  in  the  til- 
lage of  the  soil  and  service  for  pay.  It  was  often  necessary  for 
the  vassal  to  render  his  lord  financial  support,  but  this  obliga- 
tion being  a  personal  one  it  was  discharged  by  the  payment  of 
a  stated  sum  called  a  "auxilum"  or  "aid"  and  not  a  tax.  To 
have  called  the  payment  a  tax  would  have  been  objectionable 
to  the  vassal  and  it  would  have  lowered  the  social  standing  of 
the  lord,  hence  it  was  called,  "a  present,"  as  if  it  were  coming 
from  out  of  the  good  will  (of  the  giver)  and  not  from  compul- 
sion.2 

'Emerton.     Medieval  Europe,  480.  *Ibid,  491. 


80  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

THE  BREHON  LAW. 

The  Brehon  Law  is  intensely  interesting  because  it  deals  with 
a  people  of  the  primitive  times  and  yet  a  people  who  had  deve- 
loped certain  distinct  institutions.  These  early  celts  made 
wealth  a  requisite  for  holding  positions  of  honor  and  power. 

A  wealth  aristocracy  existed  amongst  this  people  of  which 
the  chief  ruler  as  king  or  emperor  was  the  head.  "The  dif- 
ference between  the  eorl  and  ceorl  is  a  primary  fact  from  which 
we  start."1  Tacitus  made  a  similar  classification  in  Germanic 
Societies,  the  noble  and  the  non-noble  freeman,  likewise  Caesar 
divided  all  continental  Celtic  tribes  into  the  equites  and  the 
plebs. 

The  selection  of  a  chief  was  determined  by  his  wealth. 
"Whatever  a  chief  is,  he  is  a  rich  man,  not  however,  rich  as 
popular  associations  would  lead  us  to  anticipate,  in  land,  but 
in  live  stock — in  flocks  and  herds,  in  sheep  and  before  all  things 
oxen."2  The  Cain  Aigillne  tract,  279,  lays  down  the  law  that 
"the  head  of  every  tribe  should  be  the  man  of  the  tribe  who  is 
the  most  experienced,  the  most  learned,  the  most  truly  popular, 
the  most  powerful  to  oppose,  the  most  steadfast  to  sue  for  profits 
and  to  be  sued  for  losses."3 

Maine  concludes  that  personal  wealth  was  the  principal  con- 
dition of  the  chief  maintaining  his  position  and  authority. 
Giddings  agrees  with  Maine  on  this  point.4 

PROMOTIONS. 

Wealth  was  the  means  of  promotions  among  this  people. 
The  Bo-Aire5  were  divided  into  seven  grades,  the  basis  of  divi- 
sion being  the  amount  of  wealth  possessed  by  the  chief.  "At 
the  bottom  of  the  scale  is  the  chief  or  noble  called  the  Aire- 
desa,  and  the  Brehon  law  provides  that  when  the  Bo-Aire  has 
acquired  twice  the  wealth  of  an  Aire-desa,  and  has  held  it  for 
a  certain  number  of  generations  he  becomes  an  Aire-desa."8 
Land  was  not  the  only  important  form  of  wealth.  Among  the 
Brehons  it  counted  for  little  as  it  does  among  any  people 
where  land  is  plenty.  The  peasant  needed  not  only  land,  but 

'Maine.     Early  History  of  Institutions,  131.  2Ibid,   133.  3Ibid,   134. 

4Giddings.     Principles  of  Sociology,  295. 

5NoTE — The  Bo-Aire  or  Cow-nobleman  was  a  peasant  who  had  become  rich  through 
cattle. 

6Maine.     Early  History  of  Institutions,  136. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  81 

means  to  work  the  land,  and  as  much  of  the  land  was  for  graz- 
ing and  as  cattle  were  in  great  demand,  in  cattle  was  the  Bo- 
Aire  rich.  Cattle  were  even  used  for  wife  purchase.  The  chief 
was  able  to  secure  political  prestige  as  well  as  other  services  by 
being  able  to  aid  the  people.  The  same  custom  prevails  among 
the  Zulu.  "The  retainers  of  a  Kaffir  chief  serve  him  for  cattle, 
his  retinue,  court,  or  whatever  it  is  -to  be  called,  consists  of  men 
from  all  parts  of  the  tribe,  the  young,  the  clever,  and  the  brave, 
who  come  to  do  court  service  for  a  time,  that  they  may  obtain 
cattle  to  furnish  them  with  the  means  of  procuring  wives,  arms, 
or  other  objects  of  desire."1  2 

Much  earlier  than  the  times  of  which  Fustel  de  Coulanges 
writes  wealth  secured  political  power.  Among  the  Homeric 
Greeks,  it  was  a  sure  winner  of  office.  "Kings  were  regularly 
reported  wealthy,  their  riches  no  doubt  aided  in  their  elevation.7'3 
When  Greece  became  a  Roman  province,  the  offices  of  magis- 
trate and  ruler  were  conferred  on  those  who  had  large  fortunes 
and  "in  Asia  Minor  the  controlling  influence  was  placed  in  the 
hands  of  the  rich."4 

In  Rome  political  positions  were  held  by  men  of  wealth. 
"It  is  the  census  that  raises  a  man  to  the  dignity  of  a  Senator; 
it  is  the  census  that  distinguishes  the  Roman  Knight  from  the 
plebian;  it  is  the  census  that  determines  promotions  in  the  camp 
and  it  is  according  to  the  census  that  the  judge  is  chosen  in 
the  Forum."5 

Office  holding  came  not  only  to  the  rich  but  later  was  made 
hereditary  and  thus  these  positions  were  retained  under  the  con- 
trol of  a  few  great  families. 

WEALTH  SECURES  POLITICAL  RIGHTS. 

In  a  primitive  society,  there  is  need  of  some  one  to  act  as 
the  ruler  or  leader  and  that  some  one  either  through  popular 
selection  but  more  often  by  usurpation  becomes  such  a  leader, 
and  this  leader  tends  to  become  despotic.  But  whenever  the 
ruler  must  select  others  to  aid  him  in  the  administration  of 
political  affairs,  it  is  the  nobles  that  are  selected  and  from  these 
arises  a  political  aristocracy.  The  aristos  or  noble  thus  chosen 

Biddings.     Principles  of  Sociology,  294. 

2Maine.     Early  History  of  Institutions,  143. 

'Keller.     Homeric  Society,  98. 

«Loria.     Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  147.  «Ibid,  137. 


82  THE    SOCIAL    POWEK    OF    WEALTH 

is  always  from  the  freemen,  those  who  have  wealth,  those  who 
are  able  to  contribute  to  the  support  of  the  leader  and  his 
rule. 

The  next  stage  of  development  is  the  rise  of  the  lower  class, 
those  who  are  neither  nobles  or  serfs.  Their  rise  is  also  due  to 
to  their  accumulation  of  wealth.  The  possession  of  wealth 
places  power  in  their  hands  and  leads  them  to  SEEK  and  DE- 
MAND recognition  and  the  enjoyment  of  larger  political  liber- 
ties and  privileges.  Because  they  can  contribute  support  to  the 
monarch  he  grants  at  least  some  of  their  demands  and  in  return 
for  the  concessions  granted  he  receives  revenue  in  the  form  of 
tribute  or  taxes  or  they  agree  to  rally  to  the  monarch's  aid  in 
times  of  war  either  of  defense  or  conquest. 

Leslie  holds  that,  "the  owners  of  property  are  on  the  eve 
of  becoming  a  powerless  minority,  and  the  many,  to  whom  the 
whole  power  of  the  state  is  of  necessity  gravitating,  see  all  the 
means  of  subsistence  and  enjoyment  offered  by  nature  in  the 
possession  of  the  few."1  This  only  states  a  partial  truth.  That 
the  consolidation  of  wealth  is  taking  place  is  only  too  evident, 
yet  while  the  owners  are  few  in  numbers  they  are  able  to  exert 
a  greater  political  control  than  do  the  large  majority  of  prop- 
ertyless  people. 

Men  of  wealth  hold  office.  In  case  they  do  not  wish  to  be 
burdened  with  the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  office  and  en- 
joy its  emoluments  and  honors,  they  can  exercise  power  and 
secure  favorable  legislation  by  having  men  favorable  to  their  in- 
terests placed  in  office. 

So  long  as  the  exercise  of  political  power  stands  as  the  sign 
of  social  power  so  long  people  of  wealth  seek  office  and  authority. 
As  under  the  feudal  system  political  power  stood  for  the  personal 
attribute  of  the  lord,  and  so  long  as  this  power  and  privilege 
could  be  handed  down  from  father  to  son,  so  long  did  the  pos- 
session and  the  exercise  thereof  stand  as  the  mark  of  social 
power,  but  when  political  and  economic  changes  take  place  and 
law  and  politics  became  mere  positions  of  salary,  nobility  and 
people  of  wealth  lose  the  desire  for  office  holding. 

'Leslie.     In  Introduction  to  Laveleye's  Primitive  Property,  XXI. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST 


CHAPTER  II. 


GERMANIC  PRACTICES. 

MASS  AGAINST  CLASS. 

England  may  be  taken  as  a  type  of  the  social  power  of 
wealth  in  the  field  of  politics.  The  rules,  customs,  practices 
and  laws  of  the  Teutonic  people  were  early  established  in  Eng- 
land, and  as  this  influence  prevailed  throughout  western  and 
central  Europe,  by  studying  England  the  condition  of  a  large 
part  of  the  continent  of  Europe  is  learned. 

Feudalism  in  England  dated  from  the  ascension  of  William, 
1066.  The  king  was  all  powerful  and  held  the  depossessed  Saxon 
land.  This  was  divided  among  the  barons  who  in  turn  pledged 
their  service  to  the  king.  This  system  prevailed  until  the  time 
of  King  John,  when  the  Magna  Charta  was  obtained  and  there 
was  formed  the  great  Council  or  Parliament  (House  of  Lords), 
but  this  was  composed  only  of  men  of  wealth,  "earls,  great 
barons,  and  prelates."1 

The  organization  of  the  House  of  Commons  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  III,  1258,  was  not  altogether  a  victory  of  the  common 
people,  for  the  common  people  only  come  to  power  as  they  pos- 
sess wealth,  except  through  revolution  as  in  France  under  the 
old  regime,  but  even  in  France  some  of  the  people  had  acquired 
wealth.  It  required  almost  four  hundred  years  for  the  House 
of  Commons  to  win  its  final  triumph. 

Before  the  time  of  Charles  II,  1649,  the  king  enfranchised 
and  disfranchised  places  at  his  pleasure.  Seats  were  bought  and 
sold.  Constituencies  sometimes  contained  only  eight  or  ten  vot- 
ers and  the  candidate  for  parliament  was  named  by  a  peer  or  a 
wealthy  land  owner,  if  the  King  did  not  make  selection.  "Out 
of  a  House  of  658,  513  for  England  and  Wales,  45  for  Scotland, 
and  100  for  Ireland,  the  number  of  nominee  members  was  487 — 
there  being  371  for  England  and  Wales,  45  for  Scotland,  and  71 
for  Ire, and.  Those  for  England  and  Wales  were  nominated  by 
87  peers,  9  commoners  and  16  by  the  crown.  The  Scotch  nom- 
inee members  were  returned  by  21  peers  and  14  commoners  and 

Burdock.     A  History  of  Constitutional  Reform,  13. 


84  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

the  Irish  by  36  peers  and  19  commoners.  In  all  there  were  only 
202  individuals  who  had  the  nomination  of  those  487  members 
which  constituted  a  very  large  majority  of  the  house."1 

As  late  as  1710  the  law  required  that  a  knight  of  a  shire 
must  have  an  income  from  land  of  £600  and  a  burrough  member 
£300.  Up  to  1832  a  landed  income  was  necessary  for  a  person 
to  be  eligible  for  membership  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

Unless  a  person  paid  parish  rates,  or  was  a  member  of  a  cor- 
poration, or  a  householder,  or  the  owner  of  a  40  S.  freehold  he 
could  not  vote.  Even  the  Reform  of  1832  left  five-sixths  of  the 
adult  males  disfranchised. 

The  possession  of  wealth  has  been  the  one  requisite  for  the 
privilege  of  voting.  In  1851  A.  M.  Locke  King  introduced  a 
motion  making  £10  the  basis  of  voting.  In  1854  Lord  John 
Russell  introduced  a  bill  making  the  qualification,  a  yearly  sal- 
ary of  £100,  or  £10  yearly  dividend  from  government  funds, 
Bank  Stocks,  or  East  India  Stock;  or  the  payment  of  40  S.  a 
year  either  to  income  tax  or  assessed  taxes. 

In  1858  property  qualification  for  English  and  Irish  mem- 
bers was  abolished.  Mr.  Disrael  in  1859  introduced  a  bill  mak- 
ing personal  property  the  basis  of  franchise.  The  third  great 
struggle  in  England  for  a  more  liberal  franchise  lasted  from 
1864  to  1884.  The  details  of  this  struggle  need  not  be  here 
cited.  It  was  the  old  strife  between  the  upper  and  lower  classes. 
Wealth  and  aristocracy  only  yield  to  the  non-landed  class  after 
a  tremendous  struggle.  Property  qualification  was  the  cry  of 
the  anti-reformers.2 

Justices  of  the  Peace  serve  without  pay,  the  office  being  en- 
tirely without  pay,  the  position  being  one  of  honor,  of  dignity 
and  of  social  distinction.  "This  is  shown  primarily  by  the  qua- 
lifications for  the  offices.  The  early  laws  provided  that  'good' 
men  or  the  'most  worthy'  should  be  appointed.  Under  Richard 
II  it  was  enacted  that  they  should  consist  of  the  'most  sufficient 
knights,  esquires  and  gentlemen  of  the  law'  of  the  country.  * 
*  *  The  qualifications  at  present  are  estate  in  land  worth 
£100  a  year,  or  the  occupation  of  a  dwelling  assessed  at  the 
same  annual  amount."3 

iMurdock.  A  History  of  Constitutional  Reform,  taken  from  Oldfield's  Representa" 
tive  History,  6:285-300.  2Ibid,  263. 

'Howard.     King's  Peace,  278. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  85 

So,  ''retired  capitalists,  young  men  of  rank,  members  of  par- 
liament are  ready  to  have  their  names  included  in  the  commis- 
sion though  they  may  never  exercise  the  functions  of  the  office."1 
Thus  those  who  possess  wealth  can  command  and  secure  addi- 
tional privileges  and  honor. 

LEGISLATION. 

Since  Parliament  was  composed  of  men  of  wealth  or  those 
who  represented  wealth  the  laws  were  made  to  favor  the  rich. 
The  laws  were  not  only  partial  but  they  were  despotically  ad- 
ministered. They  deal  with  many  phases  of  life.  Attention  is 
only  called  to  a  few.  The  reference  is  to  the  year  in  which 
they  were  passed.  1710  and  1732  show  the  effort  to  retain  of- 
fice for  the  man  of  means.  1718  and  1802  shows  the  severe 
punishemnt  meted  out  to  violators  of  the  game  laws.  It  must 
not  be  forgotten  that  the  wealthy  alone  enjoyed  the  privilege 
of  hunting  and  that  it  was  the  poor  man  that  was  tempted  to 
violate  such  laws.  If  the  poor  man  got  into  debt  he  must  go 
to  prison  but  by  the  law  of  1738  the  peer  could  not  be  imprisoned. 
The  law  of  1740  imprisoned  the  laborer  for  non-fulfillment  of 
contract.  The  1780  law  restricted  franchise  to  those  assessed 
for  land  tax.2 

1690  Act  passed  to  give  landlord  power  of  sale  over  tenant's 
effects,  and   extending   right  of  seizure  over  corn,  loose,  or  in 
the  straw,  or  in  a  granary,  etc.     Wm.  and  M.,  session  I.  C.  5. 

1691  Act  for  the  discovery  and  punishment  of  deer-stealers, 
3  W.  and  M.  C.  10. 

1692  Act  giving  power  to  search  for  game,  etc.,  4  and  5 
Wm.  Ill,  C.  23. 

1709.  Act  giving  a  preference  to  landlord  for  one  year's 
rent  over  ordinary  creditors,  8  Anne,  C.  14. 

1710.  Act  prescribing  that  a  knight  of  a  shire  must  have 
£600  a  year,  and  a  borrough  member  £300  a  year,  of  income 
from  land,  9  Anne,  C.  5. 

1710.  Act  against  night  poaching,  9  Anne,  C.  12. 

1715.  Act  for  the  protection  of  trees,  1,  Geo.  I,  C.  48. 

1718.  Act  for  further  punishment  of  deer-stealers,  5  Geo.  I, 
C.  15. 

'Howard,  King's  Peace,  279. 

2 From  Murdock.     A  History  of  Constitutional  Reform,  27-30. 


86  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

1718.  Act  imposing  7  years'  transportation  on  any  one  en- 
tering a  park  and  killing  a  deer.  5  Geo.  I,  C.  16. 

1720.  Act  to  prevent  journeymen  tailors  in  London  from 
combining  to  raise  wages  or  lessen  hours  of  work — their  hours 
being  from  6  A.  M.  to  8  P.  M.,  with  an  hour  for  dinner.     7  Geo. 
I,  C.  13. 

1721.  Act  for  recovery  of  penalties  under  game-laws.     8 
Geo.  I,  C.  19. 

1725.  Act  to  prevent  weavers  from  combining  to  raise 
wages.  12  Geo.  I,  C.  34. 

1731.     Act  for  ejection  of  tenants.     4  Geo.  II,  C.  18. 

1731.  Act  to  prevent  frauds  against  the  common  laws.     5 
Geo.  II,  12. 

1732.  Act  fixing  £100  per  annum  from  land  as  the  quali- 
fication of  a  justice  of  the  peace.     5  Geo.  II,  C.  18. 

1738.  Act  giving  landlords  power  to  recover  their  tenants 
goods  removed  from  premises.  2  Geo.  II,  C.  19. 

1738.  Act  freeing  peers  from  imprisonment  even  for  a  crown 
debt.  2  Geo.  II,  C.  24. 

1741.  Act  imposing  hard  labour  in  house  of  correction  to 
a  journeyman  who  neglects  performance  of  engagements  in  mak- 
ing up  gloves,  boots,  etc.  13  Geo.  II,  C.  8. 

1745.  Act  for  the  more  effectual  prevention  of  those  of 
mean  estate  from  becoming  justices  of  the  peace.  28  Geo.  II, 
C.  20. 

1741.  Act  providing  hard  labour  in  house  of  correction  for 
artificers,  labourers,  etc.,  for  misconduct.  20  Geo.,  C.  19. 

1749.  Act  extending  13  Geo.  C.  8  to  workers  in  woolen 
and  linen  goods,  whereby  anyone  not  fulfilling  engagement  to 
be  sent  to  house  of  correction.  22  Geo.  II,  27. 

1757.  Act  extending  20  Geo.  II,  C.  19,  to  agricultural  labour- 
ers, 31  Geo.  II,  C.  11. 

1765.  Act  imposing  transportation  on  anyone  who  destroys 
or  takes  conies  in  the  night  time.     5  Geo.  Ill,  C.  36. 

1766.  Act  imposing  3  months'  in  the  house  of  correction  on 
apprentices,  handicrafts  men,  or  labourers,  for  non-fulfilling  con- 
tract.    6  Geo.  Ill,  C.  25. 

1766.  Act  imposing  7  years'  transportaion  for  destruction 
of  trees  or  shrubs  in  night  time.  6  Geo.  Ill,  C.  36. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  87 

1770.  Act  imposing  not  more  than  6  months  and  not  less 
than  3  months  for  killing  game  in  night  time.  10  Geo,  III,  C.  19. 

1773.  Act  providing  that  the  journeymen  weavers  of  silk 
in  London  and  Middlesex  be  periodically  fixed  by  Lord  Mayor 
or  justice  of  peace — that  masters  paying  more  or  less  shall  for- 
feit £50 — that  men  asking  or  taking  more  or  less  shall  forfeit 
40  S.  13  Geo.  Ill,  C.  68. 

1777.  Act  ordering  journeymen  in  hat  trade,  on  appealing 
to  quarter  session  anent  raising  wages  or  lessening  hours  of  work, 
to  find  sureties  to  abide  judgment.  17  Geo.  Ill,  C.  55. 

1780.  Act  prohibiting  any  one  from  having  a  county  vote 
unless  assessed  for  land  tax  for  6  months.  20  Geo.  Ill,  C.  17. 

1782.  An  act  imposing  a  fine  of  £500  and  imprisonment 
of  12  months  on  any  one  contracting  with  or  encouraging  a 
workman  in  calicos  or  linens  to  leave  country.  22  Geo.  Ill, 
C.  60. 

1785.  Act  extending  this  to  workers  in  iron  or  steel.  25 
Geo.  Ill,  C.  67. 

1791.  Act  imposing  heavy  corn  duties,  if  wheat,  44  S., 
duty  5  S.  31  Geo.  Ill,  C.  30. 

1796.  Act  prohibiting  assemblies  of  50  persons  to  petition 
parliament  or  discuss  grievances,  unless  7  householders  give  no- 
tice to  authorities  and  the  meeting  was  advertised — and  at  such 
meeting  nothing  to  be  done  to  stir  up  hatred  or  contempt  of  the 
government  or  constitution  on  pain  of  death,  without  the  benefit 
of  clergy.  36  Geo.  Ill,  C.  8. 

1796.  Places  for  lectures  on  grievances  to  be  licensed.  36 
Geo.  Ill,  C.  8. 

1796.  Act  against  combinations  of  men  in  paper  works  for 
raising  wages  or  lessening  hours.  36  Geo.  Ill,  C.  3. 

1799.  Act  to  suppress  societies  formed  for  overturning  gov- 
ernment. 39  Geo.  Ill,  C.  79. 

1799.  Act   consolidating   laws   against   journeymen   of   all 
kinds,   combining  to  raise  wages  or  lessen  hours  or  quantity 
of  work  and  imposing  3  months'  imprisonment  or  two  months 
in  the  house  of  correction.     39  Geo.  Ill,  C.  81. 

1800.  Act  imposing  40  S.  or  6  months'  imprisonment  on 
a  collier  who  refused  to  fulfill  engagement.     39  and  40  Geo. 
Ill,  C.  77. 

1802.     Act  imposing  seven  years'  transportaion  for  hunting, 


88  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

snaring,  or  injuring  deer  within  an  inclosure  and  a  penalty  of 
£50  if  uninclosed.  42  Geo.  Ill,  C.  107. 

1804.  Act  imposing  very  heavy  corn  duties,  duty  on  wheat, 
24  S.  3  d.  44  Geo.  Ill,  C.  109. 

1807.  Act  extending  to  Ireland  the  laws  for  having  wages 
of  artificers,  labourers  and  servants  fixed  by  a  justice  of  the 
peace.  47  Geo.  Ill,  C.  43.  Session  1. 

POLAND. 

Northern  Europe,  as  is  seen  in  the  history  of  Poland,  was 
no  different  than  German  Europe  or  England.  As  the  nobility 
of  Poland  became  wealthy  they  became  the  determining  power 
in  legislation.  "In  1466,  after  the  conquest  of  the  Vistula,  and 
its  opening  for  the  export  of  agricultural  products,  the  nobility 
became  wealthy.  This  preponderance  of  the  nobility  made  it- 
self felt  in  the  enactment  of  the  Diet  of  1496,  by  which  the  right 
of  migration  by  the  peasants  was  greatly  limited.  The  citizens 
were  deprived  of  their  right  to  possess  landed  property,  and  the 
higher  dignities  in  the  church  were  made  eligible  for  nobility 
alone."1 

Likewise  as  the  cities  became  poorer  they,  "  became  weaker 
in  culture,  education  and  fellow  feelings,  at  the  very  moment 
when  their  natural  rival,  the  nobility,  greedily  accumulated 
riches,  political  influence  and  new  ideas."2 

THE  PRESENT  GERMAN  SITUATION. 

Much  of  the  old  wealth-political  system  still  exists  in  Ger- 
many for  the  suffrage  system  of  the  smaller  German  states 
practically  excludes  the  poor  man  and  places  political  power 
in  the  hands  of  those  who  possess  wealth.  Hans  Markwald,3 
thus  summarizes  the  situation.  Sachsen  Weimer  practically  ex- 
cludes proletariat  by  a  cunningly  devised  method  of  tax  quali- 
fications. The  same  thing  is  true  of  Anhalt,  where  an  income 
of  1050  marks  per  year  is  necessary  for  the  exercise  of  the  suf- 
frage in  towns  and  600  in  the  country.  Two  delegates  are  ap- 
pointed by  the  reigning  grand  duke  and  eight  by  the  wealthiest 
land-owners.  In  Reusy  Greiy  three  of  the  12  delegates  are 
named  by  the  prince,  and  2  by  the  noble  class,  the  remaining  7 


Lectures  on  Slavonic  Law,  113.  2Ibid,   113. 

"Markwald.     Stuttgart  Neue  Zeit. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  89 

being  selected  by  the  tax  payers.  The  taxes  commence  at  an 
income  of  600  marks.  In  the  principality  of  Lippe  5  of  the  21 
delegates  are  elected  by  the  owners  of  the  agricultural  lands, 
131  acres  being  the  minimum;  2  delegates  are  chosen  by  those 
who  pay  180  marks  or  more  in  income  taxes,  while  7  of  the  dele- 
gates are  elected  by  those  who  pay  at  least  36  marks  in  ground 
and  income  tax.  The  remaining  7-  are  chosen  by  those  who  be- 
long to  none  of  the  privileged  classes. 

In  Sachsen-Altenburg  of  the  30  delegates,  9  are  elected  by 
the  largest  tax  payers.  Those  who  do  not  belong  to  this  class 
are  divided  into  3  classes  according  to  the  amount  of  taxes  paid 
and  it  is  needless  to  say  that  we  never  find  workmen  in  the  first 
class  and  but  rarely  in  the  second,  nor  can  any  one  vote  who  is 
behind  3  months  in  his  taxes,  or  who  is  provided  by  his  employer 
with  board  and  lodging.  Each  of  the  3  above  mentioned  classes 
elects  7  men. 

In  the  "republic"  of  Bremen  only  those  persons  are  entitled 
to  vote  who  pay  a  burgership  fee  of  16.50  marks.  Sixty-eight 
representatives  of  the  citizens  are  chosen,  but  4  of  the  deputies 
are  elected  by  the  wealthy  classes,  14  by  the  intellectual,  40  by 
members  of  the  stock  exchange,  2  by  independent  manufacturers, 
and  8  by  the  great  farmers.  In  the  "free  state"  of  Lubeck  only 
those  can  vote  who  for  an  uninterrupted  period  of  five  years 
have  possessed  an  income  of  at  least  1300  marks,  and  who  have 
paid  taxes  on  the  same.  Still  more  plutocratic  is  the  electional 
system  of  Hamburg,  where  half  of  the  160  of  the  citizens'  repre- 
sentatives are  elected  by  the  privileged  classes.  Of  the  15  dele- 
gates of  Schwargburg-Sondershausen,  a  third  are  named  by  the 
ruler  of  the  country,  5  are  elected  by  the  largest  tax  payers, 
and  5  by  the  people. 

In  Saxony  the  Prussian  System  has  been  followed  closely, 
and  only  tax  payers  are  entitled  to  vote.  As  in  Prussia,  the 
voters  are  divided  into  3  classes  by  means  of  a  division  into  3 
portions  of  the  total  tax  paid,  the  number  of  votes  allowed  to 
each  individual  varying  with  the  class  in  which  he  is  found. 

In  Waldeck  only  those  can  vote  who  possess  a  dwelling  house 
or  other  piece  of  real  property,  worth  at  least  300  marks,  or  who 
pay  at  least  3  marks  direct  tax  per  year.  The  latter  are  those 
who  have  at  least  300  marks  yearly  income.  In  Brunswick  we 
find  that  of  48  deputies,  30  are  chosen  by  means  of  the  Prussian 


90  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

three-class  system,  2  by  the  priests  of  the  various  churches  and 
5  by  the  largest  income  tax  payers,  4  by  the  largest  land-owners, 
3  by  the  largest  tax  payers  among  the  manufacturers,  4  by  the 
educated  classes. 

WEALTH  AND  TAXATION. 

Every  organized  government  necessitates  expense.  This  ex- 
pense is  usually  provided  for  by  taxation.  When  taxes  are 
equitably  levied  and  justly  and  efficiently  expended,  no  class 
of  the  people  is  burdened.  But  when  the  tax  is  unequitably 
laid  and  the  privileged  classes  escape  paying  their  just  share 
those  least  able  to  pay  are  unjustly  burdened. 

Since  people  of  wealth  possess  the  most  political  power  they 
make  the  laws  favorable  to  themselves  and  shunt  the  burden  of 
taxation  from  themselves. 

While  people  of  wealth  pay  taxes  as  do  the  poor  there  seems 
to  be  this  difference.  1.  The  poor  are  compelled  to  pay,  the 
tax  is  a  levy,  a  tribute,  an  impost.  2.  While  for  the  rich  it 
assumes  the  form  of  a  gift.  The  element  of  compulsion  is  left 
out.  They  are  able  to  escape.1  The  capitation  (caput)  tax  of 
Diocletian  became  a  plebian  capitation  tax.  The  land  owners 
escaped  paying  it.2 

The  great  Roman  land  owners  of  the  fourth  century  escaped 
many  of  the  taxes.  For  such  tax  as  was  made  new  privileges 
were  exacted.  "If  the  emperor  granted  a  remission  of  taxes, 
they  (the  rich)  saw  to  it  that  they  monopolized  the  benefit.  The 
governors  and  functionaries  of  every  grade  did  not  dare  to  enter 
into  a  struggle  with  those  personages,  who  were  high  in  their 
own  district  and  who  had  often  held  high  places  in  the  govern- 
ment service  or  at  court,  moreover  the  governors  and  function- 
aries themselves  belonged  to  the  senatorial  class,  of  which  the 
great  land  owners  were  members  and  were  therefore  only  too 
willing  to  shut  their  eyes  to  such  misdeeds."5 

By  special  legislation  the  rich  escape  their  just  share  of  the 
tax.  In  Prussia  (1873)  the  law  provided  that  the  income  tax 
paid  by  any  one  person  should  not  exceed  7200  Thalers,  this 
proviso  exempted  all  incomes  over  240,000  Thalers.4 

Restricted  sufferage  is  favorable  to  the  property  class,  under 

iMunro  and  Sellery.     Medieval  Civilization,  34.  2Ibid,  35.  »Ibid,  40. 

4Loria.     Economic  Foundations  of  Society,  212. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  91 

such  conditions  personal  taxes  are  higher  and  property  tax  lower. 
In  England  the  rich  pay  4.7%  of  their  incomes  for  taxes  while 
the  poor  pay  7.9%. 

And  in  the  United  States  it  is  generally  conceded  that  prop- 
erty of  high  valuations  pays  proportionally  less  tax  than  prop- 
erty of  low  valuation. 

The  condition  of  France  before  the  Revolution  of  1789  pre- 
sents a  vivid  picture  of  the  immunity  which  the  privileged 
classes  enjoyed  from  taxation  in  full  or  in  part.  The  nobles 
and  ecclesiastics  were  exempt  from  (1)  personal  taille  and  from 
(2)  the  cultivators  taille.1  This  tax  was  important  for  from  it 
were  paid  the  salaries  of  army  officers,  governors  and  provincial 
commanders,  fees  of  police  and  court  officials.  It  also  provided 
for  the  construction  of  bridges,  roads,  canals,  public  buildings, 
charitable  institutions,  post-houses  for  horses,  fencing  and  riding 
schools,  paving  and  sweeping  Paris,  and  in  some  provinces  the 
support  of  schools.  Thus  it  is  seen  that  this  was  an  important 
tax. 

The  poll  tax  which  was  to  be  paid  equally  according  to  the 
property  was  in  many  cases  either  not  paid  at  all  or  paid  only 
in  part,  "one  who  should  have  paid  1700  to  2500  livres  paid 
only  400  livres,  while  one  of  the  lower  class  who  should  have 
paid  70  livres,  was  required  to  pay  720  livres."  The  same  im- 
munity was  enjoyed  by  the  wealthy  in  regard  to  the  vingtiemes 
and  the  corvee  or  direct  tax.2 

The  payment  of  taxes  being  considered  a  mark  of  servitude 
and  a  badge  of  oppression  the  nobles  and  clergy  under  pretext 
of  saving  their  dignity  secured  exemption  from  paying  taxes.8 


CHAPTER  III. 

AMERICA. 
QUALIFICATION  FOR  SUFFRAGE. 

Turning  from  the  old  world  with  all  its  traditions  and  deeply 
seated  customs,  with  its  aristocracy  and  monarchy,  to  the  new 


Ancient  Regime,  362.  2Ibid,  464. 

*Blanc.     Le  Peuple  avant  La  Revolution  in  Readings  from  French  History  by  Super, 
79. 


92  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

world,  one  looks  for  equality  in  affairs  political.  But  much  the 
same  principle  prevails  in  the  new  as  in  the  old.  Suffrage  as 
the  privilege  only  of  the  property  class,  lasted  to  a  very  late 
date.  This  shows  the  persistent  power  of  wealth  to  seek  and 
maintain  political  control. 

Republics  are  unhealthful  to  aristocracies  and  democratic  in- 
stitutions make  for  equality.  So  in  the  evolution  of  American 
politics  there  has  been  a  transition  from  the  basis  of  property 
to  the  basis  of  ideas.  "The  American  system  rests  fundamen- 
tally on  the  franchise,  all  our  constitutions  and  laws  are  devices 
to  enfranchise  the  man.  He  is  the  center  of  the  civil  system. 
His  freedom  and  responsibility  are  the  measure  of  our  politics. 
The  hundred  years  of  national  history  marks  a  change  from  a 
government  founded  on  property  to  a  government  founded  on 
persons."1  In  1785  only  one  person  in  thirty  was  a  voter,  to- 
day one  in  five  votes. 

This  struggle  for  the  acquirement  of  political  rights  and 
privileges  has  been  the  struggle  against  wealth.  The  ability 
of  wealth  to  so  long  retain  this  prerogative  is  the  more  remark- 
able in  view  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  which  de- 
clares:2 

1.  That  all  men  are  created  equal.  2.  That  they  are  en- 
dowed by  their  maker  with  certain  inalienable  rights.  3.  That 
among  these  rights  are  life,  liberty  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness. 
4.  That  to  secure  these  rights,  governments  are  instituted  among 
men,  deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  gov- 
erned. 

The  thirteen  colonies  through  their  representatives  accepted 
these  principles.  Every  thing  in  these  declarations  indicated 
that  all  men  without  regard  to  the  possession  of  wealth  were  to 
enjoy  equal  rights. 

Eleven  of  the  thirteen  colonies  immediately  adopted  state 
constitutions* setting  forth  with  much  positiveness  the  equality 
of  men.  Massachusetts  declared,  "government  is  instituted  for 
the  common  good,  for  the  protection,  safety,  prosperity  and  hap- 
piness of  the  people,  and  not  for  the  profit,  honor  and  private 
interest  of  any  one  man,  family  or  class  of  men." 

Thorpe.     A  History  of  the  American  People,  527. 

2McMaster.     The  Acquisition  of  the  Political,  Social,  and  Industrial  Rights  of  Man. 

NOTE — A  free  use  of  McMaster  has  been  made  for  this  data,  16-20. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  93 

North  Carolina  declared  "no  man  or  set  of  men  are  invited 
to  exclusive  or  separate  emoluments  or  privileges  from  the  com- 
munity except  in  consideration  of  great  public  service." 

In  spite  of  such  declarations  of  equality,  the  right  of  fran- 
chise and  of  office  holding  were  restricted  to  those  who  possessed 
wealth. 

New  Hampshire,  the  voter  must  be  a  tax  payer.  Massachu- 
setts, a  person  must  possess  a  freehold  estate  yielding  an  in- 
come of  £3  a  year,  or  to  have  a  personal  estate  worth  £60. 

Connecticut,  an  annual  income  of  $7.00  from  a  freehold  es- 
tate or  real  estate  rated  on  the  tax  list  as  worth  $134. 

New  York,  a  freehold  estate  of  £30  or  a  house  rent  of  40  S. 

New  Jersey,  more  liberal  than  many  of  the  states,  allowed 
all  persons,  male  or  female,  white  or  black,  native  or  alien,  to 
vote,  provided  they  owned  real  estate  worth  £50. 

Maryland,  a  freehold  of  £50  in  the  county  where  the  vote 
was  offered  or  personal  property  of  £30. 

Virginia,  required  the  ownership  of  25  acres,  property  planted 
with  a  house  12  feet  square  on  a  foundation,  or  50  acres  of  wild 
land  or  a  freehold  or  estate  interest  in  a  lot  in  some  estate  esta- 
blished by  law. 

South  Carolina,  a  freehold  of  50  acres  or  own  a  town  lot,  or 
have  paid  a  tax  equal  to  the  tax  on  50  acres  of  land. 

Georgia,  one  must  own  £10  of  property  and  pay  a  tax.1 

So  influencial  was  wealth  that  to  November  16th,  1877,  in 
New  Jersey  woman  could  vote  if  she  owned  real  estate. 

QUALIFICATION  FOR  OFFICE. 

The  second  political  privilege  of  a  citizen  is  to  be  allowed  to 
hold  office  and  thus  help  to  make  and  execute  the  laws  of  his 
land.  In  many  countries  the  right  to  vote  always  precedes  the 
right  to  hold  office  and  this  country  has  been  no  exception  to 
this  rule.  The  privilege  has  been  also  placed  on  a  higher  prop- 
erty holding  than  voting.  This  has  given  the  man  of  wealth 
the  advantage  and  has  added  to  his  social  prestige.  Attention 
is  now  called  to  the  property  requirements  for  office  holding  in 
the  several  states  at  the  formation  of  the  union.2 

New  Hampshire,  a  voter  had  to  possess  £100.     Massachu- 

iMcMaster,  17.  2McMaster,  20. 


94  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

setts,  a  freeholder  of  £100  or  personal  estate  of  £200  in  order 
to  be  a  member  of  the  lower  house. 

New  York,  a  freeholder  of  £100  over  all  debts. 

New  Jersey,  one  must  possess  a  personal  estate. 

Delaware,  "he  must  have  the  proper  qualifications;"  which 
meant  property  qualification. 

Maryland,  to  become  a  member  of  the  assembly,  a  person 
must  be  worth  £500. 

North  Carolina,  "a  member  of  the  house  of  commons  must 
be  possessed  and  continue  to  be  possessed  in  fee  simple  or  for 
life  of  a  freehold  of  100  acres  of  land." 

South  Carolina,  a  representative  must  own  500  acres  of  land 
and  ten  negro  slaves,  or  real  estate  worth  £150  clear  of  debt. 

Georgia,  the  ownership  of  200  acres  of  land  or  property 
worth  £250  was  necessary  to  be  eligible  for  a  member  of  the 
legislature. 

To  be  eligible  for  membership  in  the  upper  house  a  person 
had  to  possess  twice  as  much  as  for  the  lower  house.  The  basis 
of  office  holding  was  property.  "The  man  of  small  means  might 
vote,  but  none  save  well  to-do  Christians  could  legislate,  and  in 
many  states  none  but  a  rich  Christian  could  be  a  governor. 
*  *  *  Heavy  property  qualifications  were  added,  for  the 
governor  must  not  only  be  pious  but  rich.  In  one  state  he  must 
own  property  worth  £100,  in  another  £5,000,  in  South  Caro- 
lina, £10,000." 

Hildrith  quotes  C.  Pinckney  as  saying,  "I  was  opposed  to 
the  establishment  of  an  undue  aristocratic  influence;  but  he 
thought  it  essential  that  the  members  of  the  legislature,  the 
executive,  and  the  judges  should  be  possessed  of  competent 
property  to  make  them  independent  and  respectable.  Were  he 
to  fit  the  quantum,  he  should  not  think  of  less  than  $10,000 
for  the  president,  half  as  much  for  each  of  the  judges  and  in 
like  proportion  for  the  members  of  the  legislature."1 

The  social-political  power  based  on  property  rights  is  fur- 
ther shown  by  the  system  of  representaion  adopted  by  the  thir- 
teen original  states.  "In  but  one  did  it  rest  on  population.  In 
New  England  members  of  the  upper  house  were  chosen  in  dis- 
tricts or  countries,  and  were  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  pub- 
lic taxes  paid  in  each." 

Jffildrith.     History  of  the  United  States,  2:507. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL.  INTEREST  95 

In  New  York  the  number  of  senators  from  a  district  were 
in  proportion  to  the  number  of  freeholders  owning  estates  valued 
above  £100. 

To  own  property  gave  a  man  the  right  to  vote,  to  own  more 
property,  gave  the  right  to  hold  some  offices,  to  own  still  more 
property,  gave  the  right  to  hold  other  and  higher  offices. 

Representation  in  the  National  House  of  Representatives 
passed  through  an  evolution  similar  to  that  of  local  and  state 
representation.  "A  proposition  was  adopted  declaring  that  the 
share  of  each  state  should  be  in  proportion  to  the  value  of  all 
lands  within  its  border  granted  to  or  surveyed  for  any  person 
with  the  value  of  all  buildings  and  improvements  added."1 

Strong  as  was  the  religious  feeling  among  the  early  colonists 
as  a  qualification  for  voting  and  holding  office  it  was  abandoned 
long  before  the  property  qualification  was  discontinued.  "In 
New  England  the  religious  qualifications  were  abolished  in  1691, 
through  the  efforts  of  the  crown,  and  property  substituted.  This 
excluded  nine-tenths  of  all  adult  males  from  participating  in 
colonial  elections  and  at  least  one-half  from  taking  part  in  the 
town  meeting."2 

A  reaction  took  place.  By  1820  seven  new  states  had  en- 
tered the  union,  two  of  which  restricted  the  franchise  to  "free 
white  males"  who  paid  a  tax.3  The  idea,  that  all  men  should 
vote  and  not  simply  money-men,  gained  force.  By  1860  prop- 
erty qualifications  for  voting  and  holding  office  were  largely 
cast  off.4 

The  states  of  the  northwest  have  not  had  property  qualifi- 
cations. The  new  states  of  the  south  did  require  property  quali- 
fications for  governors  and  assemblymen.  "Frontier  settle- 
ments are  always  unfavorable  to  social  and  other  distinctions."5 
The  overthrow  of  the  social  power  of  wealth  in  the  field  of 
American  politics  is  not  yet  quite  complete,  for  in  a  few  states 
a  property  qualification  is  still  required.6 

For  Suffrage,  South  Carolina  (1895)  own  property  assessed 
at  $300.00. 

Louisiana,  (1898)  same  as  South  Carolina. 

iMcMaster,  20. 

'Ashley.     The  American  Federal  State,  60. 

»McMaater,  24. 

4Thorpe.     A  History  of  the  American  People,  416. 

5Ashley.     The  American  Federal  State,  130.         2Ibid,  appendix,  Tables  I  and  II. 


96  THE  SOCIAL  POWER  OF  WEALTH 

QUALIFICATIONS  OF  VOTERS  (1900). 

Rhode  Island,  a  residence  of  two  years,  unless  an  owner  of 
property  worth  $134.00,  or  pay  rental  of  $7.00  a  year,  to  vote 
for  city  councilors  or  on  finance. 

Pennsylvania,  pay  state  or  county  tax,  if  22  years  of  age  or 
over. 

South  Carolina,  own  property  assessed  at  $300.00,  paid  poll 
tax. 

Mississippi,  paid  taxes  for  two  years  previous. 

Louisiana,  read  or  write,  or  own  property  assessed  at 
$300.00,  unless  the  person  or  his  ancestors  voted  before  Janu- 
ary 1,  1867. 

Arkansas,  pay  poll  tax. 

Tennessee,  pay  poll  tax. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE  ILLICIT  USE  OF  WEALTH. 

To-day  wealth  is  a  potent  factor  in  the  political  field,  for- 
merly it  held  political  power,  now  it  seeks  to  control  this  power 
by  purchase  direct  and  indirect. 

The  manner  in  which  the  ward  politician  makes  use  of  wealth 
to  acquire  and  retain  political  favor  is  most  admirably  told  by 
Miss  Jane  Addams.1 

The  real  leaders  of  the  people  make  themselves  a  part  of  the 
life  of  the  community  whose  interests  they  control.  They  live 
near  the  masses  of  the  voters,  they  know  them  intimately,  they 
realize  their  needs  and  to  these  needs  they  minister.  What  won- 
der that  the  mass  of  the  voters  vote  for  a  certain  alderman 
when  it  is  his  money  that  bails  them  out  when  theV  are  arrested, 
it  is  his  influence  with  the  police  justice  that  helps  them  out 
materially  when  they  come  to  trial,  and  not  alone  with  the 
police  justice  but  with  the  magistrate  and  with  the  state's  at- 
torney. For  whom  else  would  the  Italian  padrone  vote  when, 
after  intercepting  the  notices  sent  by  the  commissioners  to  notify 
certain  Italian  day  laborers  that  they  were  upon  the  eligible  list 

1  Adams.     Democracy  and  Social  Ethics,  221-277. 


WEALTH    AND    POLITICAL    INTEREST  97 

and  to  report  for  work  at  a  given  day,  sold  these  same  notices 
to  the  same  workmen  for  $5.00  each  and  a  share  in  the  wage, 
and  was  convicted  and  fined  $75.00  for  the  act,  again,  for  whom 
else  would  he  vote  after  his  alderman  promptly  paid  the  fine 
and  gave  him  assurance  of  protection  from  any  further  trouble. 

This  same  alderman,  just  for  pure  friendliness  (?),  pays  the 
rent  when  the  family  cannot  do  so,  finds  "jobs"  for  the  men, 
divides  among  his  followers  all  the  places  from  the  city  hall 
that  he  can  seize. 

He  gives  presents  at  weddings,  family  festivals  and  holidays, 
distributes  passes  on  the  railroad,  buys  numerous  tickets  to  the 
benefit  entertainments,  contributes  to  prizes  for  the  handsomest 
woman,  most  popular  man,  or  most  beautiful  baby,  scatters  dol- 
lars instead  of  pennies  at  the  church  bazaars. 

Perhaps  at  no  other  times  is  his  money  more  in  evidence 
than  at  the  funerals  of  the  poor.  When  no  coffin  could  be  had 
but  for  his  buying  (for  no  disgrace  could  be  felt  so  keenly  as  to 
have  a  member  of  one's  family  buried  at  county  expense)  no 
carriages  to  ride  in  save  through  his  bounty,  no  flowers,  no  min- 
ister, in  fact  no  funeral.  What  limit  can  be  placed  on  the  power 
his  wealth  exists.  He  manages  several  saloons  where  good  fel- 
lowship is  always  in  evidence,  he  distributes  tons  of  turkevs 
each  Christmas,  furnishes  cigars,  not  by  ones,  but  by  handfulls, 
all  the  "jobs"  and  offices  in  any  way  connected  with  the  city 
pay  roll  come  as  his  gift,  all  requests  to  the  council  go  through 
him.  This  same  alderman,  whose  career  has  just  been  reviewed, 
gave  $3,000.00  to  uniform  and  equip  a  boys'  temperance  club 
in  one  of  the  churches  of  his  ward.  This  is  but  one  phase  of 
the  politician's  use  of  wealth. 

CONCLUSION. 

Society  is  dynamic.  Political  society  has  not  stood  still.  Its 
movements  have  not  been  uniform.  Each  movement  has  pro- 
duced an  advance.  Early  political  societies  were  dominated  by 
Greed  and  Fear.  This  explains  why  in  early  societies  one  man 
could  secure  much  power. 

The  mass  fearful  of  the  foe  accepted  the  man  of  arms.  The 
insecurity  of  normadic  conditions  gave  rise  to  the  rule  of  the 
one  and  of  the  few.  The  one  and  the  few  became  autocratic 
and  their  rule  despotic.  Reaction  and  revolution  took  place 


98  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

the  absolute  state  fell.  Individual  rights  were  granted  and 
guaranteed.  Mass  struggled  against  class  and  mass  aided  by 
social  and  economic  changes  won. 

Throughout  all  these  changes  wealth  has  played  a  conspicu- 
ous role.  Men  early  recognized  the  social  power  of  wealth  and 
that  it  was  the  stepping  stone  to  the  satisfaction  of  desires  for 
political  power.  Political  power  passed  from  the  control  of  the 
Fighting-man  to  the  Rich-man.  Men  have  sought  wealth  in 
order  that  they  might  be  able  to  secure  this  power  of  rule. 

The  changes  in  economic  and  industrial  life  have  made  the 
common  man  count.  These  changes  placed  wealth  within  the 
reach  of  the  many  and  the  many  have  secured  political  rights 
and  privileges. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  99 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

Adam,  Juillette.     The   Dowries  of  the   Women  of  France. 

North  American  Review,  152,  37-46. 

Adams,  Brooks.     The  Law  of  Civilization  and  Decay.  — ~ 
Addams,  Jane.     Democracy  and  Ethics. 
Andrews,  E.  B.     Institutes  of  General  History. 
Ashley,  Roscoe  Lewis.     The  American  Federal  State. 
Bagehot,  Walter.     The  English  Constitution. 
Bodley,  John  Edward  Courtenay.     France. 
Bosanquet,  Bernard.     Aspects  of  the  Social  Problem. 
Burnell  and  Hopkins.     The  Ordinances  of  Manu. 
Breen,  Mathew  P.     Thirty  Years  of  New  York  Politics. 
Bryce,  James.     American  Commonwealth. 
Buckle,  H.  T.     History  of  Civilization  in  England. 
Calonne,  Alphonse  de.     Nineteenth  Century,  42,  438-446. 
Carnegie,  Andrew.     The  Gospel  of  Wealth.  •*" 
Cecil,  Evelyn.     Primogeniture. 
Champlin,   John    D.,   Jr.     The    Manufacture   of   Ancestors. 

Forum  10,  565-572. 
Cherry,  Richard  R.     Lectures  on  the  Growth  of  Criminal 

Law  in  Ancient  Communities.  - 

Civil  Law  of  France,  by  Strahan.     Cushing's  Edition. 
Code  Napoleon.     Translated   by   a   Barrister  of   the   Inner 

Temple. 
Coffin,  Charles  H.     The  World's  Work.     A  Money  Test  of 

Art  Appreciation.     May,  1905. 

Cooke,  John  Esten.     Virginia,  A  History  of  the  People. 
Curtiss,  Samuel  Ives.     Primitive  Semitic  Religion  To-Day. 
Dalton,  Francis.     Hereditary  Genius. 
Darwin,  Charles.     Descent  of  Man  and  Selection  in  Relation 

to  Sex. 

Davis,  John.     The  Bhagavad  Gita. 
Dill,  Samuel.     Roman  Society. 
Earle,  Mrs.  Alice  Morse.     Fashions  and  Customs  of  Old  New 

England. 

Edwards,  B.     History  of  the  West  Indies. 
Eggleston,  Edward.     The  Transit  of  Civilization. 
Ely,  Richard  T.     Evolution  of  Industrial  Society. 


100  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 

Emerton,  Ephraim.     Mediaeval  Europe. 

Ewald,  George  Heinrich  August  von.     Antiquities  of  Israel. 

Ferguson,  Adam.     History  of  Civil  Society. 

France,  C.  J.  Property,  Its  Psychology  and  Its  Sociology. 
Arena,  23,  405-419. 

Fustel  de  Coulanges.  Histoire  des  Institutions.  Les  Trans- 
formation of  de  Royalte.  Les  Origines  du  Systeme 
Feodal. 

Gibbon,  Edward.  History  of  the  Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire. 

Giddings,  Frank  H.  Principles  of  Sociology.  Inductive  So- 
ciology. 

Glasson,  Earnest  Desire.  Historic  du  droit  et  des  institu- 
tions of  Angleterre  *  *  compares  *  *  de  la  France. 

Grote,  George.     History  of  Greece. 

Grosse,  Earnest.     The  Beginnings  of  Art. 

Granger,  Frank.     The  Worship  of  the  Romans. 

Gumplowics,  Ludwig.     Outlines  of  Sociology. 

Gurewitsch,  B.  Die  Entwicklung  der  menschlichen  Bediirf- 
nisse  und  die  Sociale  Gliederung  der  Gesellschaft. 

Guyau,  M.  Art  from  the  Sociological  Point  of  View.  Non- 
Religions  of  the  Future. 

Haddon,  Alfred  Cort.     Evolution  in  Art. 

Hadley,  James.     Roman  Law. 

Hallam,  Henry.     State  of  Europe  During  the  Middle  Ages. 

Haiisser,  Ludwig.  The  Period  of  the  Reformation,  1517- 
1648.  Translated  by  Mrs.  G.  Sturge. 

Hart,  Albert  Bushnell.  American  History  Told  by  Contem- 
poraries. 

Harper,  William  Rainey.  The  Prophetic  Element  in  the  Old 
Testament.  The  Priestly  Element  in  the  Old  Testament. 

Hearn,  William  Edward.     The  Aryan  Household. 

Hastings,  Warren.  A  Code  of  Gentoo  Laws  or  Ordinations 
of  the  Pundits. 

Henderson,  Ernest  F.  A  History  of  Germany  in  the  Middle 
Ages. 

Higginson,  Thomas  Wentworth.  The  Aristocracy  of  the 
Dollar.  Atlantic  Monthly,  93,  506-513. 

Hildrith.     History  of  the  United  States,  2:  507. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  101 

Him,  Yvjo.     Origins  of  Art. 

Hobson,  John  A.     The  Evolution  of  Modern  Capitalism. 

Hopkins,  Washburn.     The  Great  Epic  of  India. 

Howard,   George  E.     History  of  Matrimonial   Institutions. 
The  King's  Peace. 

Hume,  David.     History  of  England. 

James,  George  P.     History  of  Chivalry. 

Jastrow,  Morris.     Religion  of  Babylonians. 

Jellinek,  Grorg.     The  Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man  and 
of  Citizens. 

Jevons,  Frank  Byron.     An  Introduction  to  the  History  of 
Religion. 

Johns,  C.  H.  W.     Code  of  Hammurabi. 

Jones,  Sir  William.     Institutes  of  Manu. 

Jusserand,  J.  J.     English  Wayfaring  Life  in  the  Middle  AgesXX 
Translated  by  Lucy  Toulmin  Smith. 

Keasbey,  Lindley  M.     Prestige  Value.     The  Quarterly  Jour- 
nal of  Economics,  17. 

Keller,  Albert  Galloway.     Homeric  Society. 

Kent,  Charles  Foster.     A  History  of  the  Hebrew  People. 

Larned,  Josephus  Nelson.     History  of  Ready  Reference,  5. 

Laveleye,  Emile  De.     Primitive  Property.  •*-***"* 

Leckey,  William  H.  H.     History  of  European  Morals. 

Loria,  Archille.     Economic  Foundations  of  Society. 

MacDonnell,  Arthur  A.     Sanskrit  Literature. 

Macaulay,  Thomas  Babington.     History  of  England. 

Macpherson,  William  C.     The  Baronage  and  the  Senate. 

Maine,  Sir  Henry.     Early  Law  and  Custom.     Ancient  Law. 
The  Early  History  of  Institutions. 

Mathews,  Shailer.     The  Social  Teaching  of  Jesus.  ***** 

McLennan,  John  Ferguson.     Primitive  Marriage,  in  Studies 
in  Ancient  History. 

McMaster,  John  Bach.     The  Acquisition  of  the  Political,  So- 
cial and  Industrial  Rights  of  Man  in  America. 

Milman,  Henry  Hart.     History  of  Latin  Christianity. 

Miiller,  F.  Max.     Origin  of  Religion. 

Munro  and  Sillery.     Medieval  Civilization. 

Miinsterberg,  Hugo.     The  Americans. 

Murdock,  James.     History  of  Constitutional  Reform. 

Nitti,  Francesco.     Population  and  the  Social  System. 


102  THE    SOCIAL    POWER    OF    WEALTH 


\ 


O'Brien,  John.     History  of  the  Mass. 

Ostrogorski,  M.     Democracy  and  Organization  of    Political 
Parties. 

Page,  Nelson.     The  Old  South. 

Payne,   Edward  John.     History  of  the  New  World  Called 
America. 

Paulsen,  Friedrich.     The  Evolution  of  the  Educational  Ideal. 
Forum,  23,  598-672. 

Peck,    Harry   Thurston.     The    New    American    Aristocracy. 
Cosmopolitan,  25,  701-708. 

Post,  Albert  Hermann.     Grundriss  der  Ethnologischen  Juris- 
prudenz.     Afrikanische  Jurisprudenz. 

Rattigan,  William  H.     A  Digest  of  Civil  Law  for  the  Punjab. 
>Riggs,  James  Stevenson.     A  History  of  the  Jewish  People. 

Roby,  Henry  J.     The  Twelve  Tables  of  Gortyna.     The  Law 

Quarterly  Review,  2,  135-152. 

\Ross,  Edward  A.     Social  Control.     The  Foundations  of  So- 
ciology. 

Rouse,  William  Henry  Denham.     Greek  Votive  Offering. 

Roscher,  William.     Political  Economy. 

Sanders  and  Kent.     The  Messages  of  the  Bible. 

Schaffle,  A.     Impossibility  of  Social  Democracy.     The  Quin- 
tessence of  Socialism. 

Sedgwick,    H.    D.        The    New    American    Type.     Atlantic 
Monthly,  93,  535-542. 

Sewall,  Samuel.     Diary  and  Letter  Book. 

Sigel,  Feodor.     Lectures  on  Slavonic  Law. 

Small,  Albion  W.     General  Sociology. 

Smith,  Adam.     Wealth  of  Nations. 

Smith,  Helen  Evertson.     Colonial  Days  and  Ways. 

Smith,  W.  Robertson.     The  Religion  of  the  Semites.      The 
Prophets  in  Israel. 

Sohm,  Rudolph.     Institutes. 

Spencer,  Henry.     Principles  of  Sociology. 

Starcke,  C.  N.     The  Primitive  Family. 

Starr,  Fredrick.     Popular  Science  Monthly,  40,  44-57,  194- 
236.     Dress  and  Adornment. 

Steinmetz,  S.  R,     Rechts-Verhatnisse  Von  Eingeborenen  in 
Afrika  und  Ozeanien. 

Lincoln.     The  Shame  of  the  Cities. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  103 

Sterns,  John  M.     Germs  and  Development  of  the  Laws  of 

England. 
^Stetson,  Charlotta  Perkins.     Women  and  Economics. 

Stevens,  W.  Le  Conte.     American  Titles  and  Distinctions. 
Popular  Science  Monthly,  63,  312-320. 

Super,  0.  B.     Readings  from  French  History. 

Taine,  Hippolyte  Adolphe.  The  Ancient  Regime.  Philos- 
ophic d'  Art.  (Translation  of  John  Durand.) 

Tarde,  Gabriel.     The  Laws  of  Imitation. 

The  Social  Condition  of  Women.  A  Compilation.  North 
American  Review,  42,  489-513. 

Thorpe,  Francis  Newton.     A  History  of  the  American  People. 

Tolstoi,  Lyof  N.     My  Religion.     What  is  Art? 

Trigg,  Oscar  Lovell.     Democratic  Art.     Forum,  26,  66-79. 

Trollope,  Mrs.  Frances  Milton.  Domestic  Manners  of  Amer- 
icans. 

Turner,  Frederick  J.  The  Significance  of  the  Frontier  in 
American  History.  Annual  Report  of  the  American 
Historical  Association  for  1893. 

Turner,  Sharon.     History  of  the  Anglo-Saxons. 

Tylor,  Edward  Burnett.     Primitive  Culture. 

Van  Dyke,  John  C.     Art  for  Art's  Sake. 
~^"Weblen,  Thornstein  B.     Theory  of  the  Leisure  Class. 

Viollet-le-Duc.  Dictionnaire  de  PArchitecture-Art-Pointure. 

Vitel,  M.     Etudes  Sur  1'Histoire  L'  Art. 

Ward,  Lester  F.  Dynamic  Sociology.  Outlines  of  Sociology. 
Pure  Sociology. 

Wells,  Herbert  George.     Mankind  in  the  Making. 

Westermarch,  Edward  Alexander.  History  of  Human  Mar- 
riage. 

Woltmann,  Ludwig.     Politic  Anthropoliqie. 

Wright,  Carroll  D.     Practical  Sociology. 

Yale  University  Biblical  and  Semitic  Studies. 


„ 

OVERDUE. 


N 


EC'D 


JUH 


952 


